u 


NATURAL  HISTORY 

OF  MAN 

BY 

A.DEaUATREFAGES 

l_g ^ ..__™._gj 


ANTHRO 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 


PRESENTED  BY 

PROF.  CHARLES  A.  KOFOID  AND 

MRS.  PRUDENCE  W.  KOFOID 


The  Englishman. 

"White  Eace,  European  Branch.— The  head  has  a  beautiful  oval  form,  the  nose  is  larg'e  and 
straight,  the  aperture  of  the  mouth  moderate  in  size,  inclosed  by  delicate  lips ;  the 
teeth  are  nrransred  vertically;  the  eyes  are  large,  wide  open,  and  surmounted  by  curved 
brows.  The  forehead  is  advanced,  and  the  face  well  proportioned ;  the  hair  is  glossj% 
long,  and  abundant. 


THE 


NATURAL  HISTOEY  OF  MAN: 


A  COURSE  OF  ELEMENTARY   LECTURES. 


BY 

A.    DE    QUATEEFAGES,  ^  T^T^a^U^ 

MEMBER  OF  THE   ACADEMY   OF   SCIENCES;    PROFESSOR  IN  THE  MTJSEtIM  O? 
KATCRAL   HISTORY. 


TRANSLATED    FROM   THE  FRENCH, 
By  ELIZA  A.  YOUMANS. 


WITH    AN    APPENDIX. 


NEW   Y^ORK: 
B.    APPLETON    AND    COMPANY, 

549    AND    551    BEOADWAT. 
1875. 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1ST5,  by 
D.  APPLETON   &   COMPANY, 

In  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress,  at  Washington. 


TKANSLATOE'S    PEEFAOE. 


The  study  of  the  races  of  mankind  in  recent  times,  by  the 
method  of  Natural  History,  has  given  rise  to  an  important  branch 
of  knowledge  known  as  the  science  of  Anthropology.  Societies 
have  been  established  in  various  countries  for  its  promotion,  and 
many  learned  works  have  been  written  upon  it  in  different  lan- 
guages. The  subject  has,  moreover,  now  become  one  of  such 
great  public  interest,  that  it  is  important  it  should  be  presented 
in  its  rudiments  for  the  benefit  of  beginners.  In  this  country, 
'especially,  where  all  the  great  races  of  the  world — European, 
African,  Asiatic,  and  American — are  thrown  togetlier  on  an  im- 
mense scale,  and  practical  problems  of  great  difficulty  arise  from 
the  interaction  of  diverse  foreign  populations,  it  is  desirable  that 
broad  scientific  views  of  the  subject  should  be  widely  dissemi- 
nated. 

The  author  of  this  little  volume  of  lectures.  Prof,  de  Qua- 
trefages,  of  Paris,  is  one  of  the  eminent  founders  of  Anthropo- 
logical Science,  and  he  has  also  shown  himself  to  be  a  most  suc- 
cessful popular  teacher  of  the  subject.  In  the  clearness  and  sim- 
plicity of  his  statements,  the  fehcity  and  fullness  of  his  illustra- 
tions, the  colloquial  vivacity  of  his  style,  and  the  skill  with  which 
he  brings  large  questions  within  the  range  of  ordinary  apprehen- 
sion, he  certainly  has  but  few  equals.  His  elementary  lectures  on 
the  "Natural  History  of  Man,"  delivered  to  audiences  of  work- 


ivi3650KS 


4  TRANSLATOR'S  PREFACE. 

ing-people  in  Vincennes,  were  extensively  circulated  upon  the 
Continent  in  diflerent  languages  ;  and  the  translations  of  several 
of  them,  printed  in  The  Popular  Science  Monthly^  have  heen  re- 
ceived with  such  favor  as  to  induce  their  republication  in  this 
collected  form. 

Upon  certain  fundamental  questions  in  Natural  History,  such 
as  the  nature  of  species,  and  the  origin  of  man,  wide  differences 
of  opinion  have  latterly  grown  up  among  naturalists,  and  are 
contested  with  great  earnestness  by  the  respective  parties.  The 
theory  of  development,  which  teaches  that  the  higher  forms  of 
life  are  derived  from  tlie  lower,  is  now  maintained  by  many  emi- 
nent scientific  men  in  Germany,  England,  and  this  country;  but 
Prof,  de  Quatrefages  holds  to  the  old  views  which  still  prevail  in 
France,  and  he  enforces  them  with  his  usual  ability  in  the  follow- 
ing pages.  That  this  little  book  may  fairly  represent  the  present 
state  of  opinion  upon  the  subject,  it  has  been  thought  best  to  give 
briefly  the  arguments  on  the  other  side  in  an  Appendix.  The  ob- 
jections to  Prof,  de  Quatrefages's  positions,  there  stated,  have 
been  kindly  furnislied  by  one  of  our  leading  biologists.  Prof. 
Theodore  Gill,  of  the  Smithsonian  Institution  ;  and  the  notes  of 
the  Appendix,  when  not  otherwise  accredited,  are  on  his  au- 
thority. 

It  is  proper  to  remark,  however,  that  these  differences  of 
opinion  are  of  minor  importance  in  relation  to  the  objects  of 
this  book.  It  has  been  translated,  because  it  is  the  most  admi- 
rable popular  introduction  to  the  study  of  the  races  of  mankind 
that  has  yet  appeared  ;  and,  in  the  work  of  translation,  the 
author's  style  of  exposition  has  been  followed  as  literally  as 
possible. 


COISr  TENTS 


PAGE 

Preface 3 


LECTURE  I. 
The  Unity  of  the  Human  Species 7 

LECTURE   IL 
The  Antiquity  of  Man 34 

LECTURE   m. 
The  Origin  of  Man 64 

LECTURE  IV. 
Physical  Characters  of  the  Human  Race 89 

LECTURE  V. 
Intellectual  and  Moral  Characters  of  the  Human  Race  .        .110 


APPENDIX 139 


THE  :n^atueai.  histoet  of  man. 


LECTURE  I. 

THE   UNITY    OF   THE    HUMAN    SPECIES. 

Gentlemen:  Each  of  my  fellow-laborers  in  science 
comes  here  to  lecture  to  you,  and  selects  the  subject  which 
habitually  occupies  him.  Some  tell  you  of  the  heavens, 
the  earth,  the  waters ;  from  others  you  get  the  history  of 
vegetables  and  animals.  As  I  am  Professor  of  the  Natural 
History  of  Man  at  the  Museum,  I  ask  myself  why  I  should 
not  speak  to  you  of  man. 

There  is  evidently  as  much  interest  for  us  in  the  his- 
tory of  our  own  species  as  in  that  of  animals,  even  of  those 
most  useful  to  us.  Indeed,  at  the  present  time,  the  mind 
is  drawn  toward  this  study  by  an  irresistible  movement. 
Formerly,  Anthropology,  the  natural  history  of  man,  was 
not  represented  in  philosophical  bodies,  nor  by  the  periodi- 
cal press.  Now,  in  Paris  alone  there  are  two  Philosophical 
Societies  occupied  exclusively  with  this  science,  and  two 
large  publications  equally  devoted  to  it.  At  the  Museum 
the  teaching  of  anthropology  is  older.  It  is  there  aided  by 
a  collection  which  is  still  the  best  in  the  world. 

I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  it  is  one  of  the  glories  of 
France  to  have  given  by  these  methods  an  example  to  the 


8  THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

entire  world — an  example  followed  to-day  in  America  as 
well  as  in  Europe.  And  I  wish  to  make  you  take  a  part 
in  this  movement,  by  giving  you  some  serious  notion  of  the 
ensemble  of  the  human  family. 

My  task,  gentlemen,  is  more  difficult  than  is  that  of 
my  associates.  In  all  these  lectures  we  are  to  speak  of 
only  a  single  being,  man.  Consequently,  there  will  be  an 
intimate  union  between  them,  so  much  so  that  any  person 
who  should  miss  a  lecture  would  find  difficulty  in  thoroughly^ 
understanding  those  that  follow.  To  remove  this  difficulty, 
I  mean  to  shape  my  teaching  so  that  each  lecture  w^ill  form 
as  definite  a  whole  as  possible.  Then,  at  the  commence- 
ment of  each  lecture,  I  shall  endeavor  to  give,  in  a  few 
words,  a  resume  of  the  preceding.  In  this  way  I  hope  to 
carry  you  to  the  end  without  ceasing  to  be  understood. 

Each  lecture,  then,  will  be  a  sort  of  chapter  of  what  we 
might  call  Popular  Anthropology. 

By-and-by  I  hojoe  that  these  lectures  will  be  collected 
into  a  volume,  and  I  shall  be  very  proud  if  one  day  they 
merit  the  adjective  I  have  employed — if,  in  reality,  they 
become  popular  among  you. 

Let  us  enter,  then,  upon  our  first  chapter.  Since  man 
is  the  subject  of  our  discourse,  we  must  first  ask  what  he 
is.  But,  before  answering,  I  ought  to  enter  into  some  ex- 
planation. 

This  question  has  been  often  asked,  but  generally  by 
theologians  or  by  philosophers.  Theologians  have  an- 
swered in  the  name  of  dogma  and  religion;  philosophers  in 
the  name  of  metaphysics  and  abstraction.  Let  it  be  well 
understood  between  us  that  I  shall  take  neither  of  these 
grounds,  but  shall  avoid,  with  great  care,  both  that  of 
theology  and  that  of  philosophy.  Before  I  became  pro- 
fessor at  the  Museum,  I  was  occupied  wdth  the  study  of 
animals — I  was  a  naturalist.  It  is  as  a  naturalist  that  I 
have  taken  my  chair  at  the  Institute.     At  the  Museum  I 


THE   UNITY   OF   THE   HUMAN   SPECIES.  9 

remained  what  I  was,  and  nothing  else.  I  shall  continue 
the  same  at  Vincennes,  leaving  to  theologians  theology,  to 
philosophers  philosophy,  limiting  myself  to  science,  and 
especially  to  natural  science. 

Let  us  now  return  to  the  question  I  was  about  to  put : 
What  is  man  ? 

It  is  evidently  useless  to  insist  that  man  is  neither  a 
mineral  nor  a  vegetable — that  he  is  neither  a  stone  nor  a 
jDlant.  But  is  he  an  animal  ?  No,  indeed,  especially  when 
ice  take  mto  account  all  which  exists  in  him.  And  I  am 
sure  that  in  this  respect  j^ou  all  agree  with  me. 

Certainly  none  of  you  would  w^ish  to  be  compared  with 
cattle  that  ruminate,  with  hogs  that  wallow  in  the  mire. 
Nor  would  you  wish  to  be  classed  wdth  the  dog,  notwith- 
standing all  the  qualities  which  make  him  the  friend  and 
companion  of  man ;  nor  with  the  horse,  though  it  should 
be  with  Gladiator.* 

Man  is  not  an  animal.  He  is  widely  distinguished  from 
animals  by  numerous  and  important  characters.  I  shall 
here  only  refer  to  his  intellectual  superiority^  to  which  be- 
longs articulate  speech,  so  that  each  people  has  its  special 
language  ;  writing.^  which  permits  the  reproduction  of  this 
language  ;  the  fine  arts.,  by  the  aid  of  which  he  conveys, 
and,  in  some  sort,  materializes  the  conceptions  of  his  imagi- 
nation. But  he  is  distinguished  from  all  animals  by  two 
fundamental  characfers  which  pertain  only  to  him.  Man  is 
the  only  one  among  organized  and  living  beings  who  has 
the  abstract  sentiment  of  good  and  evil ;  in  him  alone, 
consequently,  exists  moved  sense. 

He  is  also  alcne  in  the  belief  that  there  will  be  some- 
thing after  this  life.,  and  in  the  recognition  of  a  Supreme 
Being.,  who  can  influence  his  life  for  good  or  for  evil.  It 
is  upon  this  double  idea  that  the  great  fact  of  religion  rests. 

By-and-by  these  two  questions  of  morals  and  religio7i 
*  See  Appendix  A. 


10  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

will  turn  up  again.  We  shall,  I  repeat,  examine  them, 
not  as  theologians,  but  simply  as  7iaturalists.  I  will  only 
say  for  the  present  that  man,  everywhere,  however  savage 
he  may  be,  shows  some  signs  of  morality  and  of  religion 
that  we  never  find  among  animals. 

Hence  man  is  a  being  apart,  separated  from  animals  by 
two  great  characters,  which,  I  repeat,  distinguish  him  yet 
more  tlian  his  incontestable  intellectual  superiority. 

But  here  the  differences  end.  So  far  as  the  body  is 
concerned,  man  is  an  animal,  nothing  more,  nothing  less. 
Except  some  differences  of  form  and  arrangement,  he  is  the 
equal,  only  the  equal,  of  the  superior  animals  that  surround 
him. 

If  we  take,  for  terms  of  comparison,  the  species  that 
approach  us  nearest  in  general  form,  anatomy  shows  us 
that  our  organs  are  exactly  the  same  as  theirs.  We  can 
trace  in  them,  almost  muscle  by  muscle  and  nerve  by  nerve, 
those  which  Ave  find  in  man  himself. 

Physiology^  in  its  turn,  shows  us,  in  the  body  of  man, 
the  organs,  muscles,  nerves,  performing  exactly  the  same 
functions  as  in  the  animal.  This  is  a  capital  fact  which 
daily  profits  us,  both  from  a  purely  scientific  and  from  a 
practical  point  of  view.  We  cannot  experiment  upon 
man — we  can  upon  animals.  Human  physiology  has  em- 
ployed this  means  to  discover  the  functions  of  our  organs. 
Physicians  go  further  still ;  they  bring  to  the  sick-bed  the 
fruit  of  experiments  made  upon  animals.  Anthropology 
also,  as  we  have  just  seen,  applies  to  these  inferior  creatures 
for  very  important  instruction. 

But  Anthropology  should  descend  much  lower  than  the 
animals  when  it  would  enlighten  us  completely.  Vegeta- 
bles are  not  animals,  any  more  than  animals  are  man.  But 
men,  animals,  and  vegetables,  are  all  organized  and  living 
beings.     They  are  distinguished  from  minerals,  which  are 


Fig.  1. 


The  Esquimaux. 
Yellow  Eace,  Hyperborean  Branch.— The   famihes  helonsring  to  the  yellow  race  hare  high 
cheek-bones,  a  lozenge-shaped   head,   a  small,  flat  nose,   a  flat   countenance  ;    narrow 
obhquely-set  eyes ;  straight,  coarse  black  hair ;  a  scanty  beard,  and  greenish-liued  com- 
plexion. 


12  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

neither  the  one  nor  the  other,  by  certain  general  facts 
common  to  all. 

All  organized  beings  have  a  limited  duration ;  all  are 
born  small  and  feeble ;  during  part  of  their  existence,  all 
grow  and  strengthen,  then  decrease  in  energy  and  vitality^ 
sometimes  also  in  size ;  finally  all  die.  Throughout  life, 
all  organized  and  living  beings  need  nourishment.  Before 
death,  all  reproduce  their  kind  by  a  seed  or  an  egg  (we 
speak  here  of  species,  not  of  individuals),  and  this  is  true 
even  of  those  which  seem  to  come  directly  from  a  bud,  from 
a  layer,  from  a  graft,  etc. ;  for  from  bud  to  bud,  from  layer 
to  layer,  from  graft  to  graft,  we  can  rise  to  the  seed  and  to 
the  egg.  Finally,  then,  all  organized  and  living  beings 
have  had  a  father  and  a  mother. 

These  grand  phenomena,  common  to  all  living  beings, 
and  consequently  to  man,  imply  general  laws  which  control 
them,  and  which  must  therefore  govern  man  as  well  as  the 
plant. 

Science  every  day  confirms  this  conclusion,  which  might 
have  been  reached  by  reason  alone,  but  which  may  now  be 
regarded  as  a  fact  of  ex2)erience.  And  I  believe  I  need  not 
dwell  here,  to  make  you  understand  the  magnificence  of 
this  result. 

As  for  me,  I  find  it  admirable  that  man  and  the  lowest 
insect,  that  the  king  of  the  earth  and  the  lowliest  of  the 
mosses,  are  so  linked  together  that  the  entire  living  world 
forms  but  one  whole,  all  the  parts  of  which  harmonize  in 
the  closest  mutual  dependence. 

From  this  community  in  certain  phenomena,  from  this 
subjection  to  certain  laws  equally  common,  results  a  con- 
sequence of  the  highest  importance.  Whatever  questions 
concerning  man  you  may  have  to  examine,  if  they  touch 
upon  any  of  these  properties,  of  these  phenomena  common 
to  all  organized  and  living  beings,  you  must  interrogate 
not  only  animals,  but  vegetables  also,  if  you  would  reach 
the  truth. 


THE   UNITY   OF   THE   HUMAN   SPECIES.  13 

When  one  of  these  questions  is  put  and  answered,  to 
make  the  answer  good,  to  make  it  true,  you  must  bring 
man  under  all  the  general  laws  which  rule  other  organized 
and  living  beings. 

If  the  solution  tends  to  make  man  an  exception  to 
general  laws,  you  may  affirm  that  it  is  bad  and  false. 

But  also,  when  you  have  resolved  the  question  so  as  to 
include  man  in  these  great  general  laws,  you  may  be  cer- 
tain that  the  solution  is  good,  that  it  is  true,  and  really 
scientific. 

With  these  data,  and  these  alone,  we  will  now  consider 
the  second  question  of  Anthropology,  and  here  it  is : 

Are  there  several  species  of  men,  or  is  there  but  one, 
including  several  races  ? 

To  be  understood,  this  question  requires  some  exj^lana- 
tion. 

Look  at  the  drawings  I  have  hung  at  the  bottom  of  the 
hall.  These  figures  are  part  of  those  I  em^^loy  in  the 
course  at  the  Jardin  des  Plantes.* 

I  have  brought  but  a  small  number,  but  they  suffice  to 
give  an  idea  of  the  principal  varieties  which  the  human 
type  presents.  You  have  here  individuals  taken  from 
nearly  every  part  of  the  world  ;  and  this  I  regard  as  a  very 
important  point.  You  see  that  they  differ  considerably 
from  each  other  in  color,  often  also  in  hair,  sometimes  in 
proportions,  sometimes  in  features. 

Well,  our  question  is,  whether  the  differences  presented 
by  the  human  groups  from  which  these  designs  were  taken 
are  differences  of  species,  or  if  they  indicate  only  differences 
among  races  that  belong  to  one  and  the  same  species. 

To  answer  this  question,  Ave  must  begin  by  getting  a 
clear  idea  of  what  is  meant  by  the  words  species  and  o'ace. 
In  fact,  the  whole  discussion  turns  on  these  two  words. 

*  Represented  by  illustrations  of  different  races  in  this  lecture  and 
throughout  the  volume. 


Fig.  2. 


New-Caledonian. 
Black  Race,  Eastern  Branch.— The  hlack  race  is  distinpruished  by  its  short,  woolly  hair, 
compressed  skull,  flattened  nose,  prominent  jaws,  thick  Ups,  bowed  legs,  and  black 
or  dark-brown  skin. 


THE   UNITY   OF   THE   HUMAN   SPECIES.  15 

Unhappily,  tliey  have  been  often  taken  one  for  the 
other,  or  else  they  have  been  badly  defined.  The  dis- 
cussions which  have  hence  arisen  would  very  quickly  cease, 
if  the  subject  were  studied  a  little  more  closely. 

Let  us  see  if  we  cannot  get  precise  ideas  without  going 
into  details  impossible  here. 

Certainly  none  of  you  would  ever  confound  an  ass  with 
a  horse ;  not  even  when  a  horse  is  small,  and  there  are 
horses  no  larger  than  a  Newfoundland  dog;  nor  when  an 
ass  attains  the  size  of  an  ordinary  horse,  as,  for  example, 
our  large  asses  of  Poitou.  You  say  immediately,  the}"  are 
different  species  ;  here  is  a  big  ass  and  a  little  horse.  And 
you  say  the  same  on  seeing,  side  by  side,  a  dog  and  a  wolf.^' 

On  the  other  hand,  all  of  you  here  would  give  the  single 
name  of  dog  to  animals  which  differ  from  each  other,  as  do 
the  bull-dog  and  water-spaniel,  the  greyhound  and  the  lap- 
dog,  the  Newfoundland  dog  and  the  King-Charles;  and 
you  are  right. 

However,  judging  by  sight  alone,  even  after  detailed 
observation,  you  see,  between  the  dogs  I  have  just  named, 
differences  of  size,  of  proportion,  of  color,  much  greater  than 
those  which  separate  the  horse  from  the  ass.  An  ass  and 
a  horse  of  the  same  size  certainly  resemble  each  other  much 
more  than  the  types  of  dog  I  have  just  named. 

Further,  if  you  place  side  by  side  a  black  and  a  white 
water-spaniel,  you  will  not  designate  them  by  different 
names.  You  will  call  them  both  water-spaniels,  although 
one  is  black  and  the  other  white. 

In  the  case  of  vegetables  you  do  exactly  the  same  thing. 
A  red  rose  and  a  white  rose  are  equally  roses ;  a  pear  is 
always  a  pear,  w^iether  you  buy  two  for  a  sous  in  the 
street,  or  pay  three  francs  at  Chevet, 

Well,  without  doubt,  your  decision  is  exactly  like  that 
of  the  naturalists.  You  have  answered,  just  as  they  do, 
*  See  Appendix  B. 


IQ  THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

the  question  of  species  and  race — a  question  that  at  first 
appears  very  complicated,  because  of  the  confusion  before 
referred  to.  Here,  then,  is  one  more  example  to  prove 
that,  under  many  circumstances,  popular  observation  and 
good  sense  go  straight  to  the  mark,  as  well  as  the  labors  of 
science. 

Indeed,  let  us  translate  into  general  scientific  language 
what  I  have  just  said  of  your  views,  and  I  am  very  sure  not 
to  be  mistaken  with  regard  to  them. 

The  meaning  of  this  judgment  is,  that  an  animal  or  a 
vegetable  may  vary  within  certain  limits.  The  dog  re- 
mains a  dog,  whatever  its  general  form,  its  size,  its  hair ; 
the  pear  remains  a  pear,  whatever  its  size,  its  savor,  the 
color  of  its  skin. 

From  these  facts,  which  I  simph^  allude  to,  it  results 
that  these  variations  may  be  transmitted  by  way  of  genera- 
tion. You  all  know  that  the  union  of  two  water-spaniels 
will  produce  water-spaniels ;  that  the  union  of  two  bull- 
dogs gives  bull-dogs. 

It  results,  finally,  in  a  more  general  way,  that  individuals 
of  the  same  species  may  cease  to  resemble  each  other  in  an 
absolute  manner,  may  sometimes  even  take  very  difi"erent 
characters,  without  becoming  isolated  and  forming  difi'erent 
species.  As  we  have  just  said,  the  dog  remains  a  dog, 
whatever  its  modifications. 

Well,  these  groups,  formed  by  individuals  which  have 
departed  from  the  primitive  type,  and  have  formed  distinct 
secondary  groups,  are  precisely  the  ones  that  naturalists 
call  races. 

You  understand  why  we  constantly  speak  of  races  of 
cattle,  horses,  etc.  There  is,  in  fact,  but  one  species  of 
domestic  cattle,  which  has  given  birth  to  the  race  hretonne, 
as  well  as  to  the  great  cattle  of  Uri  with  their  savage 
aspect,  and  to  the  peaceful  Durham.  We  have,  again,  but 
one  species  of  domestic  horse,  and  this  species  has  given 


Fig. 


A  NouER  Chief. 
Brown  Race,  Ethiopian  Branch. — The  brown  race  is  composed  of  a  great  variety  of 
peoples,  with  nothini?  in  common  but  a  complexion  darker  than  that  of  the  white 
and  yellow  races.     It  is  supposed  to  be  a  mixture  of  the  white,  yellow,  and  black 
races. 


18  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

birth  to  the  little  Shetland  pony,  of  which  I  sjooke  just 
now,  and  to  those  enormous  brewers'  horses  that  we  see 
in  the  streets  of  London.  Finally,  the  various  races  of 
sheep,  goats,  etc.,  have  arisen  from  one  and  the  same 
species. 

We  must  give  more  precision  to  our  ideas  on  this  point, 
because  the  least  vagueness  here  will  make  very  serious 
inconvenience.  I  will  cite  some  further  examples  taken 
from  vegetables  and  animals,  being  careful  to  choose  such 
as  are  entirely  familiar. 

You  all  know  the  seed  of  the  coifee-tree.  Permit  me  to 
give  its  history.     You  will  see  that  it  is  instructive. 

The  coifee-tree  came  originally  from  Africa,  where  from 
time  immemorial  it  has  been  cultivated  on  the  declivities 
of  Abyssinia  that  slope  toward  the  Red  Sea.  About  the 
fifteenth  century,  something  like  four  hundred  years  ago, 
the  coffee-tree  crossed  this  sea  and  penetrated  into  Arabia, 
where  it  has  since  been  cultivated,  and  whence  especially 
we  get  the  famous  Mocha  coffee. 

The  use  of  coff'ee  spread  very  early  and  with  great 
rapidity  in  the  East.  It  penetrated  Europe  much  more 
slowly,  and  it  was  first  made  use  of  in  France  at  Marseilles. 

Coff'ee  was  first  drunk  in  Paris  in  1667.  The  seeds 
which  furnished  it  were  brought  in  small  quantity  by  a 
French  traveller  named  Thevenot.  Two  years  afterward, 
in  1669,  Soliman  Aga,  ambassador  of  the  Sublime  Porte  in 
the  time  of  Louis  XIV.,  induced  the  courtiers  of  that  great 
king  to  taste  it,  and  they  found  it  very  agreeable.  How- 
ever, its  use  did  not  spread  for  a  long  time.  It  was  not 
until  the  eighteenth  century  that  it  began  to  be  generally 
adopted. 

You  see  that  coff'ee  has  not  been  very  long  in  circula- 
tion. In  fact,  it  is  scarcely  a  century  and  a  half  since  it 
became  an  article  of  general  consumption  by  the  people  of 
Europe. 


THE   UNITY   OF   THE   HUMAN   SPECIES.  19 

Well,  during  many  years  Europe  remained  tributary  to 
Arabia  for  this  commodity.  All  the  coffee  consumed  in 
Europe  came  from  Arabia,  and  particularly  from  Mocha. 
Toward  the  commencement  of  the  eighteenth  century  the 
Dutch  attempted  to  import  it  into  Batavia,  one  of  their 
colonies  in  the  Indian  Archipelago.  They  succeeded  very 
well.  From  Batavia  some  stalks  were  taken  to  Holland 
and  put  in  a  hot-house,  where  they  succeeded  equally  well. 
One  of  these  stalks  was  brought  to  France  toward  1710, 
and  was  placed  in  the  conservatory  of  the  Jardin  des 
Plantes,  and  there  also  it  prospered  and  gave  birth  to  a 
certain  number  of  sprouts. 

In  1720  or  1725  (I  have  not  been  able  to  find  the  precise 
date),  an  officer  of  the  French  Navy,  Captain  Desclieux, 
thought  that,  since  Holland  had  cultivated  coffee  at  Batavia, 
he  might  also  acclimate  it  in  our  colonies  of  the  Gulf  of 
Mexico.  When  embarking  for  Martinique,  he  took  from 
the  Jardin  des  Plantes  three  stalks  of  coffee,  and  carried 
them  with  him.  The  voyage  was  long  and  difficult,  by 
reason  of  contrary  winds.  The  supply  of  water  proving 
insufficient,  it  was  necessary  to  put  the  crew  on  rations. 
Captain  Desclieux,  like  the  others,  had  but  a  small  quantity 
of  water  to  drink  each  day.  He  divided  it  with  his  coffee- 
plants.  Notwithstanding  all  his  care,  two  died  on  the 
passage ;  only  one  arrived  safe  and  sound  at  Martinique. 
Put  at  once  into  the  earth,  it  prospered  so  much  and  so 
well  that  from  it  have  descended  all  the  coffee-trees  now 
spread  over  the  Antilles  and  tropioal  America.  Twenty 
years  after,  our  Western  colonies  exported  millions  of 
pounds  of  coffee. 

You  see  the  coffee-tree,  starting  from  Africa,  has  reached 
the  extremity  of  Asia  on  the  east  and  America  on  the  west. 
Hence,  it  has  nearly  traveled  round  the  world.  Now,  in 
this  long  voyage,  coffee  has  become  modified. 

Passing  by  the  tree,  of  which  we  know  little,  let  us  con- 


20  THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

sider  the  seed.  We  need  not  be  grocers  to  know  the 
different  qualities  of  coffees  and  their  different  production. 
Nobody  would  confound.  Mocha  with  Bourbon,  Rio  Janeiro 
with  Martinique.  Each  of  these  seeds  carries  in  its  form, 
in  its  proportions,  in  its  aroma,  the  certificate,  so  to  say,  of 
its  birth. 

Whence  came  these  changes  ?  We  cannot  know  with 
certainty,  and  explain  the  why  and  the  how,  and  follow 
rigorously  the  filiation  of  cause  and  effect ;  but,  consider- 
ing the  phenomena  as  a  whole,  it  becomes  evident  that  it 
is  to  differences  of  temperature,  of  climate,  of  culture,  that 
all  these  modifications  are  due. 

This  example,  taken  from  vegetables,  shows  that  if  we 
transport  to  considerable  distances  different  specimens  of 
the  same  vegetable,  placing  them  in  different  conditions  of 
cultivation,  we  obtain  different  races.  Tea  transported 
some  years  ago  into  troj)ical  America  would  present  us 
w^th  like  facts. 

Take,  now,  an  example  from  animals.  You  all  know 
the  turkey;  but,  perhaps,  some  of  you  do  not  know  that  it 
came  from  America.  Its  introduction  into  Europe  is  quite 
recent. 

In  America  the  turkey  is  wild ;  and  there,  in  its  natural 
conditions  of  existence,  it  presents  many  characters  which 
distinguish  it  from  our  domesticated  individuals.  The 
wild-turkey  is  a  very  beautiful  bird,  of  a  deep-brown  color, 
very  iridescent,  presenting  reflections  of  blue,  copper,  and 
gold,  which  make  it  truly  ornamental.  It  was  because  of 
its  fine  plumage  that  it  was  first  introduced  into  France. 
In  the  beginning  no  one  thought  of  the  turkey  as  food ; 
and  the  first  turke}^  served  at  table  in  France  was  in  1570, 
at  the  wedding  of  Charles  IX.,  three  hundred  and  four 
years  ago. 

As  soon  as  the  turkey  is  tasted,  it  is  found  that  he 
is  too  good  to  be  merely  looked  at.     He  passes  from  the 


THE   UNITY   OF  TUE   HUMAN   SPECIES.  21 

park  to  the  poiiltry-j^ard,  from  the  poultry-yard  to  the  farm, 
and  from  one  farm  to  another,  east,  west,  north,  and  south. 
At  present,  in  ahnost  all  France,  turkeys  are  raised  and  are 
a  considerable  object  of  commerce. 

But,  in  going  from  farm  to  farm,  in  traveling  all  over 
our  country,  this  bird  has  encountered  different  conditions 
of  existence,  differences  of  nourishment  and  temperature, 
and  never  the  primitive  conditions  that  it  had  naturally  in 
America.  As  a  consequence  of  all  tliis,  the  turkey  has  also 
varied,  and,  to-day,  not  a  turkey  in  France  resembles  the 
wild  stock.  Generally,  it  has  become  much  smaller  ;  when 
it  has  preserved  its  deep  plumage  it  has  become  darker  and 
duller ;  but  some  have  become  fawn-colored,  others  are 
more  or  less  white,  and  others  again  are  spotted  with  white, 
gray,  or  fawn-color. 

In  a  word,  almost  all  the  localities  to  which  the  turkey 
has  become  addicted  have  given  birth  to  new  varieties 
which  have  been  transformed  into  races. 

Now,  in  spite  of  these  changes,  and  although  they  do 
not  resemble  their  first  parents  in  America,  and  do  not 
resemble  each  other,  are  our  French  turkeys  less  the 
children  of  the  wild-turkey  of  America  ?  Or,  if  you  like 
it  better,  are  they  less  brothers  and  sisters  ?  Have  they 
ceased  to  be  part  of  the  same  species  ?     Evidently  not. 

What  I  have  just  said  of  the  turkey  might  also  be  said 
of  the  rabbit.  The  wild-rabbit  lives  all  around  us — in  our 
downs,  in  our  woods — and  he  does  not  resemble,  or  resem- 
bles but  little,  our  domestic  rabbits.  These,  you  know, 
are  both  great  and  small,  with  short  hair,  and  with  silky 
hair ;  they  are  black  and  white,  yellow  and  gray,  spotted  and 
of  uniform  color.  In  a  word,  this  species  comprehends  a 
great  number  of  different  races,  all  constituting  one  and  the 
same  species  with  the  wild  stock  which  still  lives  around 
us. 

From  these  facts  that  could  be  multiplied,  we  have  to 


22  THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

draw  an  important  consequence,  to  which  I  call  your  atten- 
tion : 

A  pair  of  rabbits,  left  in  a  plain  where  they  would  en- 
counter no  enemies,  in  a  few  years  would  fill  it  with  their 
descendants,  and,  in  a  little  while,  all  France  would  be 
easily  peopled.  We  hav^e  just  seen  that  a  single  stalk 
of  coffee  gave  birth  to  all  the  coffee-trees  now  found  in 
America. 

The  wild-turkeys  and  their  domestic  offspring,  the  wild- 
ral)bits  and  their  captive  descendants,  may  then  be  con- 
sidered by  the  naturalist  as  alike  arising  from  a  jDrimitive 
pair. 

Gentlemen,  this  is  the  stamp  of  a  species.  Whenever 
you  see  a  greater  or  less  number  of  individuals,  or  groups 
of  individuals,  if,  for  one  reason  or  another,  you  can  look 
upon  them  as  descendants  of  a  single  primitiv^e  pair,  you 
may  say  you  have  before  you  a  species  ;  if  from  group  to 
group  there  are  differences,  you  say  these  are  the  races  of 
that  species. 

Observe  carefully,  gentlemen,  that,  in  thus  expressing 
myself,  I  have  not  stated  for  certain  the  existence  of  this 
primitive  pair  of  the  stock  of  rabbits  or  of  the  stock  of  tur- 
keys. I  affirm  no  such  thing,  because  neither  experiment 
nor  observation — the  two  guides  we  should  always  follow 
in  science — can  aid  us  on  this  point.  I  only  say  to  you, 
every  thing  is  as  if  they  had  been  derived  from  a  single 
pair. 

You  see,  after  all,  the  question  of  species  and  of  race  is 
not  very  difficult  to  comprehend,  not  even  very  difficult  to 
settle  when  we  know  the  wild  type,  when  Ave  have  the  his- 
toric data  which  enable  us  to  connect  with  this  type  the 
more  or  less  different  groups  which  domestication  has  de- 
tached. But  when  we  do  not  know  the  wild  type,  when 
the  historic  data  are  lost,  the  question,  on  the  contrary, 
becomes  extremely  difficult  at  the  first  step,  because  differ- 


THE   UNITY   OF   THE   HUMAN  SPECIES. 


23 


ences  that  we  encounter  from  individual  to  individual,  and, 
above  all,  from  group  to  group,  might  be  considered  as 
specific  differences. 

Happily,  Physiology  comes  now  to  our  relief.  We  en- 
counter here  one  of  those  great  and  beautiful  general  laws 
upon  which  the  established  order  depends,  and  which  we 


Fm.  4. 


Mexican  Indian. 

Red  Race,  Northern  Branch.— This  division  is  rather  imperfect  from  an  ethnological 
point  of  view.    Its  characters  are  a  mbcture  of  the  yellow,  white,  and  black  races. 


admire  more  the  more  we  study.  Tliis  is  the  law  of  cross- 
breeding— a  law  which  governs  animals  as  well  as  vege- 
tables, and  is,  of  course,  applicable  to  man  himself. 

You  know  what  is  meant  by  the  word  crossing.     We 

2 


24  THE    NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

mean  by  it  all  marriages  occurring  between  animals  that 
belong  either  to  two  different  species,  or  to  two  different 
races.  Well,  the  results  of  these  marriages  obey  the  fol- 
lowing laws,  which  are: 

When  this  union  takes  place  between  two  animals  be- 
longing to  different  species — that  is,  when  we  attempt 
hybridization — in  the  immense  majority  of  cases  the  mar- 
riage is  sterile.  Thus,  for  example,  the  experiment  of 
uniting  rabbits  and  hares  has  been  tried  thousands  of  times 
all  over  the  world.  This  experiment  is  said  to  have  suc- 
ceeded twice.  But  these  two  alleged  facts  are  much  more 
doubtful  than  the  results  of  experiments  recently  made  by 
a  man  of  true  talent,  skilled  in  the  art  of  experimenting, 
and  who  believes  in  the  possibility  of  these  unions,  who  has 
completely  failed.  Although  he  furnished  the  best  condi- 
tions for  success,  he  w^as  not  more  fortunate  in  his  results 
than  Buffon,  and  the  two  Geoffroy  Saint-Hilaires  before 
him. 

So  the  rabbit  and  the  hare  are  of  such  a  nature  that,  al- 
though presenting  in  appearance  a  great  conformity,  they 
cannot  reproduce  together.* 

Such  is  the  general  result  of  crossing  two  different  sj^^e- 
cies. 

In  many  cases,  the  union  of  two  individuals  of  different 
species  is  fertile,  but  the  offspring  cannot  reproduce.  For 
example,  I  refer  you  to  the  union  of  the  ass  and  horse.  This 
union  produces  the  mule.  All  the  mules  in  the  world  are 
the  offspring  of  the  jackass  and  the  mare.  Now,  these  ani- 
mals are  numerous,  for  in  Spain  and  in  tropical  America 
they  are  much  preferred  for  work  to  horses,  because  of 
their  resistance  to  fatigue.  The  hin?ii/,  less  in  demand, 
because  less  robust  than  the  mule,  is  the  result  of  an  in- 
verse cross ;  it  is  the  offspring  of  the  horse  and  the  ass. 
The  hinny,  like  the  mule,  cannot  reproduce  its  kind. 
*  See   Appendix  C. 


THE   UNITY   OF   THE   HUMAN   SPECIES.  25 

When   we  wish   for  either,  we  must  have  recourse  to  the 
two  species. 

Finally,  in  extremely  rare  exceptions,  the  fertilit}^  per- 
sists in  the  oiFspring,  but  it  is  much  diminished.  It  dimin- 
ishes still  more  in  the  grandchildren,  and  it  is  extinguished 
in  the  third  or  fourth  generation  at  the  most.  This  is  the 
case  when  we  unite  the  canary-bird  with  the  goldfinch. 

I  might  here  accumulate  a  mass  of  analogous  facts  and 
details.  But  over  them  all  would  appear  a  great  general 
fact  including  them,  which  is  the  expression  of  a  law; 
and  here  is  this  fact :  notwithstanding  observations  reach- 
ing back  for  thousands  of  years,  and  made  on  hundreds  of 
species,  we  do  not  yet  know  a  single  example  of  interme- 
diate species  obtained  by  the  crossing  of  animals  belonging 
to  different  species. 

This  general  fact  explains  how  order  is  maintained  in 
the  present  living  creation.  If  it  had  been  otherwise, 
the  anima]  world  and  the  vegetable  world  would  be  filled 
with  intermediate  groups,  passing  into  each  other  by  in- 
sensible shades,  and,  in  the  midst  of  this  confusion,  it 
would  be  impossible  for  even  naturalists  to  make  discrimi- 
nations. 

The  general  conclusion  from  all  this  is,  that  infertility 
is  the^  law  when  animals  of  different  species  unite  (Htbei- 
dization). 

T\^ien,  on  the  contrary,  individuals  which  are  only  of 
dffh'ent  races^  but  of  the  same  species,  are  brought  to- 
gether, that  is  to  say,  when  we  produce  a  mongrel^  is  the 
result  the  same  ?     No,  it  is  exactly  contrary. 

These  crossings  are  always  fertile,  and  sometimes  more 
so  than  the  union  of  animals  of  the  same  race.  But  es- 
pecially the  children  and  grandchildren  are  also  as  fertile 
as  the  parents  and  grandparents ;  so  much  so  that  the}'" 
propagate  their  kind  indefinitely.  The  difficulty  here  is 
not  to  procure  mixed  races ;  the  difficulty  is,  when  we 


26  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

have  pure  races  that  we  desire  to  j^reserve,  to  keep  strange 
blood  from  modifying  them. 

Races  thrive  by  crossing — that  is,  by  the  union  of  differ- 
ent races  of  the  same  species,  thej^  multiply  abundantly 
around  us ;  such  are  our  street-dogs,  our  roof-cats,  our 
coach-horses,  all  our  animals  where  the  race  is  indistinct ; 
because,  by  cross-breeding  in  all  directions,  the  differential 
characters  have  become  confounded. 

So  far  from  experiencing  difficulty  in  obtaining  off- 
spring from  races,  the  men  who  are  occupied  with  cattle, 
with  sheep,  with  horses,  amateurs  in  dogs,  in  pigeons, 
know  with  what  watchful  care  they  must  protect  their  fa- 
vorite race. 

Here,  then,  is  a  general  fact,  and  from  this  fact  it  re- 
sults that  fertility  is  the  law  of  union  between  animals 
belonging  to  different  races  (Mixed  Breedixg).* 

Here,  gentlemen,  you  see  the  great  distinction,  the 
fundamental  distinction,  between  species  and  race.  And, 
it  is  all  the  more  important  to  recognize  and  record  this 
distinction,  as  it  facilitates  experiment.  When  you  have 
two  different  vegetables,  or  two  different  animals,  and  wish 
to  know  whether  they  belong  to  two  distinct  species.,  or 
only  to  two  races  of  the  same  sjjecies,  marry  them.  If  the 
union  proves  immediately  fertile,  if  the  fertility  is  propa- 
gated and  persists,  you  may  affirm  that,  notwithstanding 
the  differences  which  separate  them,  these  vegetables  and 
these  animals  are  only  races  of  the  same  species.  If,  on 
the  contrary,  you  see  the  fertilitj'-  disappear  completely  or 
diminish  notably  at  the  first  union,  if  you  see  it  decreas- 
ing, and  go  on  diminisliing,  to  disappear  at  the  end  of  a 
few  generations,  you  may  without  hesitation  affirm  that 
these  vegetables  and  these  animals  belong  to  distinct 
species.^ 

Gentlemen,  I  have  discoursed  at  length  of  vegetables 

*  See  Appendix  D.  f  See  Appendix  E. 


TUE   UNITY   OF   THE   HUMAN   SPECIES.  27 

and  animals,  of  the  cofFee-tree,  of  the  turkey,  of  the  rabbit, 
of  the  dog,  of  the  cat,  of  cattle,  etc.,  and  you  may  think 
that  I  am  forgetting  man.  On  the  contrary,  I  have  not 
ceased  to  think  of  him. 

What  is  our  question  concerning  man?  Distinctly 
this. 

Look  once  more  at  these  designs.  They  show  you 
diflPerences,  marked  enough,  between  the  human  groups, 
although  less  considerable  than  at  first  appears. 

Now,  we  do  not  know  the  type  or  the  primitive  types 
of  these  human  groups. 

Even  when  we  encounter  one  or  several  men,  present- 
ing the  characters  of  these  types,  we  cannot  identify  them, 
for  lack  of  historical  documents  upon  the  subject.  Conse- 
quently, if  we  judge  by  the  looks,  if  we  take  account  only 
of  the  men  themselves,  we  cannot  decide  whether  the  differ- 
ences they  present  are  differences  of  race  or  differences  of 
species ;  whether  man  is  to  be  considered  as  arising  from  a 
single  primitive  stock,  or  whether  we  ought  to  suppose 
several  primitive  stocks. 

But  we  have  already  said,  and  we  again  repeat,  that 
man  is  an  orgayiized  and  living  being  ;  and,  as  such,  he 
obeys  all  the  general  laws  which  govern  all  organized  and 
living  beings ;  he  consequently  obeys  the  laws  of  crossing. 
These,  then,  we  must  interrogate,  to  find  out  whether  there 
is  one  or  several  species  of  men. 

Take,  for  example,  the  tw^o  most  distinct  types,  those 
which,  more  than  any  others,  seem  separated  by  profound 
differences — the  white  man  and  the  negro. 

If  these  types  really  constitute  disti7ict  species^  their 
union  ought  to  bear  the  stamp  we  have  found  to  charac- 
terize the  unions  between  animals  and  vegetables  of  differ- 
ent species.  In  the  great  majority  of  cases  they  should  be 
infertile ;  in  all  the  remainder,  slightly  fertile  ;  the  fertility 
should  soon  disappear  and  they  should  not  be  able  to  form 


28 


THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 


intermediate  groups  between  the  negro  and  the  white. 
If  these  two  men  are  only  races  of  one  and  the  same 
species,  their  anion,  on  the  contrary,  should  be  very  fertile ; 
the  fertility  should  be  kept  up  by  their  descendants,  and 
intermediate  races  ought  to  be  formed. 


Fig.  5. 


^=^^ 


Young  Esquimaux. 


Well,  gentlemen,  the  facts  here  are  decisive,  and  admit 
of  no  hesitation.  It  is  scarcely  three  centuries  since  the 
white  man  j9ar  excellence — the  European — made,  so  to  say, 
the  conquest  of  the  world  ;  he  has  gone  everyw^here,  and 
everywhere  he  has  found  local  races,  human  groups  that 


THE   UNITY   OF   THE   HUMAN   SPECIES.  29 

do  not  resemble  him;  everywhere  he  has  crossed  with 
them,  and  the  unions  have  been  very  fertile,  sometimes 
very  sensibly  more  fertile  than  those  of  the  indigenous  peo- 
ple themselves. 

And  further,  in  consequence  of  a  detestable  institution 
wliich  happily  has  never  sullied  the  soil  of  France,  in  con- 
sequence of  slavery,  the  white  has  taken  the  negro  every- 
where, everywhere  he  has  crossed  with  his  slaves,  and 
ever37where  a  mulatto  population  has  been  formed.  Every- 
where, also,  the  negro  has  crossed  with  the  local  groups, 
and  everywhere  there  have  sprung  up  intermediate  races, 
which,  by  their  characters,  proclaim  this  double  origin. 
The  white,  finally,  has  crossed  with  these  mixed  breeds, 
and  hence  has  resulted  in  certain  parts  of  the  globe,  and 
notably  in  America,  an  inextricable  mass  of  mixed  peoples, 
perfectly  comparable  with  our  street-dogs  and  roof-cats. 

The  rapidity  with  which  these  mixed  races  cross  and 
multiply  is  truly  remarkable.  It  is  hardly  three  centuries, 
about  twelve  generations,  since  the  European  spread  over 
all  parts  of  the  world.  Well,  we  estimate  that  already 
one-seventieth  of  the  total  population  of  the  globe  are 
mixtures,  resulting  from  the  cross  of  the  whites  with  indige 
nous  peoples. 

In  certain  states  of  South  America  where  the  mixture 
began  earlier,  where  the  European  arrived  in  the  first  days 
of  discovery,  a  quarter  of  the  population  is  composed  of 
cross-breeds,  and  in  some  regions  the  proportion  is  more 
than  half. 

You  see,  our  experience  is  to-day  as  complete  as  possi- 
ble. Unless  we  deny  all  modern  science,  unless  we  would 
make  man  a  solitary  exception  in  the  midst  of  organic  and 
living  beings,  we  must  admit  that  all  men  form  only  one 
and  the  same  species,  composed  of  a  certain  number  of 
different  races  ;  we  must,  therefore,  admit  that  all  men  may 
be  considered  as  descended  from  a  single  primitive  pair. 


30  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

You  see,  gentlemen,  we  have  reached  this  conclusion, 
outside  of  all  species  of  dogmatic  or  theological  considera- 
tion, outside  of  all  species  of  philosophical  or  metaphysical 

Fig.  G. 


Sir  Salaii  Jung,  K.  S.  I. 
Brown  Eace.  Hindoo  Branch, 


consideration.  Observation  and  experiment  alone,  applied 
to  the  animal  and  vegetable  kingdom,  science,  in  a  word, 
leads  us  logically  to  this  conclusion:  there  exists  hut  one 
sj^ecies  of  men. 


THE   UNITY   OF   THE   HUMAN   SrECIES.  31 

This  result,  I  do  not  fear  to  say,  is  of  great  and  serious 
importance,  for  it  gives  to  the  thought  of  universal  brother- 
hood the  only  foundation  that  many  people  now  recognize, 
that  of  science  and  reason. 

I  hope,  gentlemen,  that  my  demonstration  has  convinced 
you.  However,  I  am  not  unaware  of  the  fact,  and  you 
doubtless  also  know,  that  all  anthropologists  are  not  agreed. 
There  are  among  my  fellow-laborers  a  certain  number  of 
men,  even  of  great  men,  who  believe  in  the  plurality  of  the 
human  species.  Perhaps  you  may  have  come  in  contact 
with  them.  Well,  listen,  then,  with  attention  to  the  rea- 
sons they  bring  in  support  of  their  view.  You  will  easily 
see  that  all  these  reasons  may  be  summed  up  in  this : 
There  is  too  much  difference  between  the  negro  and  the 
white  man  to  permit  them  to  belong  to  the  same  species. 

Then  you  reply:  Between  the  white  or  black  water- 
spaniel  and  the  greyhomid,  between  the  bull-dog  and  the 
lapdog,  there  is  much  more  difference  than  between  the 
European  and  the  inhabitant  of  Africa,  and  yet  the  grey- 
hound and  the  water-spaniel,  the  bull-dog  and  the  lapdog, 
are  equally  dogs. 

They  will  perhaps  add :  How  could  the  same  primitive 
man,  whatever  his  characters  might  be,  give  birth  to  the 
white  man  and  the  negro  ? 

You  will  answer :  How  has  the  wild-turkey,  of  which 
we  know  the  origin,  of  which  we  know  the  grandparents, 
how  has  the  wild-rabbit,  which  we  find  still  among  us,  how 
have  they  been  able  to  give  birth  to  all  our  domestic  races  ? 

We  cannot,  T  repeat,  explain  rigorously  the  how  and 
the  why ;  but  this  we  know,  the  fact  exists,  and  we  find  its 
general  explanation  in  the  conditions  of  existence,  in  the 
conditions  of  the  environment. 

Now,  man,  who  has  progressed  upon  the  earth  a  much 
longer  time  than  the  turkey  or  the  rabbit,  who  has  been 
upon  the  globe  for  thousands  of  years,  living  under  the 


32  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY    OF   MAN. 

most  diverse,  the  most  opposite  conditions,  multiplying 
further  the  causes  of  modification  by  his  manners,  his 
habits,  his  kind  of  life,  by  the  more  or  less  care  he  takes  of 
himself — man,  I  say,  is  certainly  found  in  conditions  of 
variation  much  more  marked  than  those  which  have  been 
encountered  by  the  animals  we  have  cited.  It  is  not,  then, 
surprising  that  men,  from  one  group  to  another,  present 
diflferences  of  which  we  here  see  the  specimens.  If  there 
is  any  thing  in  them  to  astonish  us,  it  is  that  these  differ- 
ences are  not  more  considerable. 

In  your  turn  you  ask  of  the  polygenesists — for  this  is 
the  name  given  to  the  philosophers  who  believe  in  the 
multiplicity  of  the  human  species — how  is  it  that  when  the 
white  man  comes  to  any  country  whatever,  at  the  antipodes, 
in  America,  in  Polynesia — how  is  it,  I  say,  that  everywhere 
he  crosses  with  human  groups  that  differ  most  completely 
from  him ;  that  these  unions  are  alwaj^s  fertile,  and  that 
everywhere  he  has  left  traces  of  his  passage  in  producing 
a  mixed  population  ? 

If  you  press  your  interlocutor  a  little,  he  will  quite 
often  deny  the  reality  of  species ;  he  will  thus  put  himself 
in  contradiction  ,with  all  naturalists  without  exception, 
botanists  or  zoologists — with  all  the  eminent  minds  who, 
following  Buffon,  Tournefort,  Jussieu,  Cuvier,  Geoffroy 
Saint-Hilaire,  have  studied  vegetables  and  animals,  out- 
side of  all  discussion,  and  without  thought  of  man. 

In  thus  dealing  wdth  the  question,  the  polygenesist  falls 
into  disagreement  with  the  best-established  science. 

Sometimes,  also,  you  will  hear  him  declare  that  man  is 
an  exception,  that  he  has  his  particular  laws,  that  the  argu- 
ments taken  from  plants  and  animals  are  not  applicable  to 
him.  Answer  him,  then,  in  the  name  of  physiology,  in  the 
name  of  all  the  natural  sciences,  that  he  is  certainly  mis- 
taken. 

It  is  quite  as  impossible  that  an  organized  and  living 


THE   UNITY    OF   THE   HUMAN   SPECIES.  33 

body  should  escape  the  laws  of  organization  and  life  as 
that  material  substances  should  escape  the  laws  that  govern 
inorganic  matter.  Therefore,  man,  an  organized  and  living 
being,  obeys,  as  such,  all  general  laws,  afld  those  of  cross- 
ing like  the  rest.  The  conclusion  we  have  drawn  is  then 
legitimate,  and  the  nature  of  the  arguments  employed  to 
combat  it  is  a  further  proof  in  its  favor. 

Gentlemen,  the  subject  of  this  lecture,  which  has  oc- 
cupied about  an  hour,  at  the  Museum  took  up  an  entice 
course.  The  exposition  has  necessaril}^  been  brief.  But  I 
hope  you  have  seen  reasons  strong  enough  to  make  you 
accept  m}'  view. 

If  doubts  remain,  try  to  come  to  my  lectures.  Some  of 
you  will  be  able,  perhaps.  I  sometimes  see  working-men 
on  the  seats  of  my  lecture-room,  and  I  can  testify  to  the 
interest  of  some  among  them.  I  own  I  was  happy  to  see 
the  attention  they  gave  to  these  exalted  questions.  It 
would  give  me  great  pleasure  to  see  at  the  Jardin  des 
Plantes  some  of  mv  audience  at  Vincennes. 


LECTURE   II. 

THE    ANTIQUITY    OF   MAN. 

GFXTr.KMF.7sr :  I  shall  to-day  continue  the  Natural  His- 
tory of  Man.  Those  of  you  who  were  present  at  our  first 
lecture  know  that  it  was  devoted  to  the  examination  of  a 
fundamental  question.  We  inquired  if  all  the  men  living 
upon  earth,  however  they  may  difi'er  among  themselves, 
are  of  one  and  the  same  species ;  that  is,  if  they  are  to  be 
regarded  as  descended  from  a  single  primitive  pair. 

To  answer  this  question,  we  appealed  to  science  alone. 
We  started  with  the  principle  that,  so  far  as  the  body  is 
concerned,  man  is  an  animal — nothing  more,  nothing  less ; 
that,  consequently,  all  the  general  laws  to  which  animals 
are  subject  bear  upon  him,  and  he  cannot  evade  their  do> 
minion. 

We  then  asked,  not  only  of  animals,  but  also  of  plants, 
What  is  meant  by  the  word  si^ecies  ?  and  we  were  led  to 
distinguish  species  from  race. 

Without  going  into  the  details  I  then  gave,  this  distinc 
tion  is  easily  established.  When  two  individuals  of  difi'er^ 
ent  species  unite,  the  union  is  almost  always  infertile,  and^ 
if  the  first  union  is  fertile,  the  offspring,  either  immediately 
or  at  the  end  of  a  few  generations,  will  reproduce  no  more. 
So  that,  between  two  species,  w^e  cannot  establish  a  third 
series  of  individuals,  starting  at  first  with  a  father  and  a 
mother  taken  from  two  distinct  species.     The  examples  I 


THE   ANTIQUITY   OF  MAN.  35 

gave  arc  known  to  you  all.  When  we  luiite  a  jackass  with 
a  mare,  an  ass  with  a  stallion,  we  obtain  a  mule  or  a  hinny, 
and  never  a  horse  or  an  ass  ;  and,  to  get  mules,  it  is  always 
necessary  to  have  recourse  to  a  jackass  and  a  mare. 

When,  on  the  contrar}',  we  take  two  individuals  of  two 
different  races  of  the  same  sj^ecies,  whatever  their  differ- 
ences of  exterior  conformation,  the  resulting  individual  is 
fertile,  and  may  give  birth  to  an  intermediate  series  of  in- 
dividuals between  the  two  races. 

As  examples,  I  took  the  different  races  of  dogs,  of 
sheep,  of  cattle.  Whatever  the  skin,  the  color,  the  form, 
the  proportions  of  the  dog,  he  is  still  a  dog;  whatever  the 
proportions,  the  figure,  the  color  of  horses  or  of  oxen,  they 
remain  horses  and  oxen.  So,  when  \ve  cross  a  water- 
spaniel  with  a  greyhound,  a  lap-dog  with  an  Havana  dog, 
the  offspring  are  fertile,  and  we  get  what  are  called  fertile 
mixed  races. 

Now,  when  human  beings  unite  with  each  other,  what- 
ever their  exterior  differences,  whether  they  are  white,  or 
black,  or  yellow,  these  marriages  are  fertile.  From  this 
fact,  verified  a  thousand  times,  we  draw  the  conclusion  that 
there  is  but  one  species  of  men,  and  that  the  differences 
existing  between  them  are  only  differences  of  race.  Again 
I  say,  in  reaching  this  conclusion,  we  have  never  gone 
beyond  science.  I  repeat  this  declaration,  because,  in  all 
that  I  shall  say  to  you,  I  wish  you  distinctly  to  understand 
that  I  never  put  foot  outside  the  domain  of  science,  where 
alone  the  scientific  man  can  speak  with  authority. 

The  unity  of  the  human  species  once  demonstrated, 
many  problems  rise  before  us. 

The  first  is  that  of  the  antiquity  of  man.  Have  men 
been  always  upon  the  earth  ?  Did  they  appear  at  the 
same  time  with  the  other  species  of  animals  ?  Are  they 
very  ancient  on  the  globe  ?  Such  are  the  first  questions 
which  present  themselves  to  our  minds. 


36 


THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN 


Throughout  all  time  have  men  lived  on  the  earth? 
Many  of  you,  doubtless,  are  already  able  to  answer  me. 
My  brother  professors  of  geology  and  paleontology  have 
probably  addressed  you  on  these  questions.  I  shall  only 
recall  to  you  the  general  facts  bearing  upon  the  case. 


Fig.  7. 


Extinct  Elephant,  or  Mammotli. 


You  all  know  what  is  the  action  of  heat  upon  certain 
bodies.  For  example,  you  all  know  that  water  heated  to 
a  certain  degree  vaporizes ;  that  if  this  vapor  loses  a  cer- 
tain quantity  of  heat,  it  is  liquefied ;  that  in  losing  still 
more,  it  forms  a  solid  body — ice.  This  ice  may  become 
so  solid,  that  in  St.  Petersburg  they  have  been  able  to  con- 
struct it  into  palaces,  and  have  made  cannons  of  ice  that 
have  been  fired.  You  can  understand  that  a  sufficient 
quantity  of  heat  will  reduce  all  bodies  to  vapor,  and  that 
sufficient  cold  will  solidify  them. 


THE  ANTIQUITY   OF   MAN.  37 

No\v,  the  facts  of  astronomy  seem  to  prove  that,  of  ohl, 
our  earth,  with  all  it  contains,  and  all  the  materials  that 
compose  it,  began  as  a  vast,  vaporous  mass  diffused  in 
space.  It  was  a  globe  of  vapor.  When  the  process  of 
cooling  set  in,  this  mass  became  liquid,  and,  during  periods 
of  time  which  we  cannot  compute,  it  was  only  an  immense 
mass  of  rocks  and  of  matter  melted  by  fire. 

It  is  needless  to  insist  on  the  fact  that,  at  this  epoch, 
on  the  surface  of  our  globe,  there  were  no  living  beings, 
and  consequently  no  men. 

The  cooling  progressing,  there  is  formed  a  pellicle  on 
the  surface  of  the  globe,  and  this  pellicle  goes  on  increas- 
ing in  thickness.  This  is  what  we  will  call  the  primitive 
earth.  On  this  primitive  earth,  during  a  long  period, 
water  could  not  exist  in  a  liquid  state,  and  consequently 
there  were  as  yet  upon  our  globe  no  living  beings,  for  all 
these  beings  need  water ;  and,  of  course,  no  men. 

But  the  process  of  cooling  continued.  The  water  which 
was  vaporized  in  the  atmosphere  fell  in  torrents  on  this 
crust  which  enveloped  the  globe ;  chemical  reactions,  of  a 
violence  of  which  we  can  form  no  idea,  were  produced. 
At  this  moment  began  the  formation  of  what  we  call  the 
earth  of  transport,  and  the  globe  entered  upon  what  is 
known  as  the  Secondary  epoch. 

Strictly  we  may  say  that,  from  the  moment  the  waters 
rested  in  a  liquid  state  upon  the  surface  of  the  earth,  life 
might  begin  to  manifest  itself.  In  certain  thermal  waters 
of  high  temperature,  we  find  confervse — microscopic  vege- 
tables which  are  already  organized  and  living.  But  no 
animal  could  yet  live  in  this  medium,  for  the  heat  would 
coagulate  its  albumen.  Later,  the  cooling  always  pro- 
gressing and  the  sea  enveloping  the  greater  part  of  the 
globe,  more  complex  vegetables  appeared.  Soon  animals, 
chiefly  aquatic,  made  their  appearance,  and  among  them  I 
would  mention  those  gigantic  reptiles  you  have  sometimes 


38  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

seen  represented  in  certain  book  announcements  on  the 
walls  of  Paris.  Mammals — man — could  not  yet  inhabit 
our  globe. 

As  the  cooling  progressed,  continents  were  formed  by 
the  upturnings  of  Nature.  The  time  came  when  true  mam- 
mals and  birds,  analogous  to  living  species,  appeared  in 
their  turn.  This  was  the  commencement  of  the  Tertiary 
epoch.  Then,  very  probably,  man  might  have  lived.  We 
shall  presently  have  to  ask  if  he  did  not  exist,  at  least  in 
the  latter  part  of  this  period. 

The  dislocation  of  the  crust  of  the  globe  elevated  the 
mountains,  dug  the  valleys,  sank  the  seas,  formed  the  con- 
tinents, and,  toward  the  end  of  the  Tertiary  period,  the 
globe  presented  a  svnface  much  resembling  what  we  see 
now^  Here  commences  the  Quaternary  period.  This  quater- 
nary period  presents  to  us  a  very  remarkable  jDhenomenon. 

Up  to  this  time,  putting  out  of  account  the  slight  oscil- 
lations that  have  occurred,  the  globe  seems  to  have  cooled 
in  a  nearly  uniform  manner,  from  the  period  when  it  formed 
only  a  mass  of  vapor,  down  to  the  Tertiary  epoch.  With 
the  Quaternary  period  came  a  moment  wherein  a  cooling, 
perhaps  sudden,  but  in  any  case  very  m.arked,  showed  it- 
self and  then  disappeared. 

At  this  time,  a  part  of  the  globe  at  least,  and  Europe 
in  particular,  was  much  colder  than  it  is  now.  We  have 
proof  of  it  in  the  glaciers  of  the  Alps.  Instead  of  stopping 
in  the  place  where  they  do  now,  these  glaciers  filled  most 
of  the  Swiss  valleys,  descending  even  in  the  valley  of  the 
Rhone;  and  from  one  end  to  the  other  of  these  valleys 
enormous  blocks  of  rock  were  transported  by  the  glaciers, 
and  -left  on  the  spot.  It  is  these  which  now  constitute 
what  we  call  erratic  blocks. 

During  the  Quaternary  epoch,  there  lived  in  France 
very  different  animals  from  those  which  we  find  now. 
Among  them  I  may  refer  to  the  great  cave-bears,  which 


THE  ANTIQUITY   OF   MAN.  39 

were  remarkable  for  their  size  and  for  their  bulging  fore- 
heads. I  will  also  mention  the  hyena.  You  know  that 
now  we  have  no  hyenas,  and  that  they  are  only  found  in 
countries  much  warmer  than  France.  To  the  preceding 
species  I  will  add  the  rhinoceros.  I  call  attention  particu- 
larly to  an  elephant,  of  which  this  is  the  picture  (Fig.  7), 
and  which  we  call  the  mammoth.  This  elephant,  you  see, 
is  easily  distinguished  from  species  now  living ;  by  its  size, 
first,  for  it  is  much  larger  than  they  ;  then  by  the  form  of 
its  remarkably  recurved  tusks  ;  finally  and  chiefly  because, 
in  the  place  of  the  naked  skin  of  the  elephants  we  know, 
he  was  covered  with  a  thick  wool  and  very  long  hairs. 

Of  these  things  we  are  certain ;  for  this  elephant  has 
been  found  preserved  whole,  with  his  skin  and  hair.  At 
different  times  there  have  been  discovered  in  the  frozen 
earth  of  Siberia  the  dead  bodies  of  these  animals.  That 
country  contains  in  such  great  numbers  the  tusks  of  these 
antediluvian  elephants,  to  employ  a  vulgar  expression,  that 
the  commerce  in  fossil  ivory  constitutes  a  considerable 
source  of  revenue,  and  the  state  reserves  a  monopoly  of  it. 

I  call  special  attention  to  this  elephant,  and  we  shall 
presently  see  why. 

The  Quaternary  period  ended  as  those  that  preceded  it ; 
and  then  began  the  present  period.  Since  the  time  of  its 
commencement,  the  continents,  the  flora,  and  the  faunae, 
have  not  undergone  any  considerable  modifications. 

Nobody  has  ever  questioned  the  existence  of  man  at 
the  beginning  of  the  present  period,  and  some  have  even 
considered  his  appearance  as  the  characteristic  feature  of 
this  period.  But  did  man  exist  before  ?  To  use  the  com- 
mon expression,  were  there  antediluvian  men  ?  In  other 
words,  and  to  return  to  scientific  language,  is  man  the  con- 
temporary of  those  animal  species  among  which  appears 
the  mammoth  ?  May  he  be  found,  like  the  mammoth,  in  a 
fossil  state  ? 


10 


THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 


Such  is  the  question  that  has  been  often  asked,  and 
which  was  long  answered  in  the  negative.  Down  to  these 
later  times,  the  most  eminent  men  in  Natural  History,  in 


FiQ.  8. 


Fig.  9. 


Arrow-shaped  Flint  Implements. 


Greolog}^,   in  Paleontology,  were  all  agreed   on  this  point; 
even  Ouvier  never  admitted  the  existence  of  fossil  man. 

To-day  we   are  led  by  many  Avell-ascertained  facts   to 
answer  this  question  very  differently.     We   are  forced  to 


THE   ANTIQUITY   OF   MAN.  41 

admit  that  fossil  man  does  really  exist,  and  that  man  was 
contemporary  with  those  species  of  animals  I  have  been 
speaking  of,  especially  with  the  mannnoth. 

This  is  certainly  one  of  the  most  remarkable  discoveries 
of  modern  times  !  The  ground  for  it  was  laid  by  the  es- 
tablishment of  a  number  of  facts  observed  in  England,  in 
Germany,  in  France.  But  the  honor  of  having  brought 
decisive  proofs,  which  convince  everybody,  belongs  incon- 
testably  to  two  Frenchmen — to  M.  Boucher  de  Perthes, 
and  to  M.  Edouard  Lartet. 

M.  Boucher  de  Perthes,  the  eminent  archaeologist  of 
Abbeville,  while  inspecting  the  excavations  made  in  the 
earth  around  his  native  village,  at  Menchecourt,  and  at  Mou- 
lin-Quignon,  discovered  stones  fashioned  in  a  peculiar  man- 
ner, and  the  same  form  was  constantly  reproduced.  It  was 
soon  evident  to  him  that  this  circumstance  was  not  acci- 
dental, but  that  these  stones  owed  their  form  to  human 
industr3\  Now,  these  polished  flints  (Figs.  8  and  9),  these 
stone  hatchets  (Figs.  10  and  11),  were  found  in  the  earth 
associated  with  the  bones  of  elephants ;  whence  he  con- 
cluded that  the  men  who  had  fashioned  them  lived  at  the 
same  epoch  with  those  great  mammifers  long  since  ex- 
tinct. 

This  conclusion,  drawn  by  M.  Boucher  de  Perthes,  w^as 
at  first  vigorously  disputed.  Some  of  the  men  whose  de- 
cisions have  justly  the  highest  authority  on  questions  re- 
lating to  the  history  of  the  earth,  thought  that  the  chipped 
flints  and  the  bones  of  elephants  were  found  together  in 
the  same  bed  because  this  bed  had  been  altered.  They 
said :  A  first  bed  was  formed  which  inclosed  the  bones  of 
elephants.  On  this  bed,  during  tlie  present  period,  men 
lived,  and  have  left  these  chipped  flints  as  a  trace  of  their 
presence.  Then  came  a  mighty  tempest,  which  rolled  and 
confounded  together  the  hatchets  and  the  elephants'  bones. 
Hence  we  now  find  them  side  by  side,  although  the  bed  in 


42 


THE   NATUEAL   HISTORY    OF   MAN. 


which  they  are  found  contains  the  remains  of  two  perfectly 
distinct  epochs. 

It  will  be  apparent  to  you  that,  if,  in  our  day,  men 
were  buried  in  this  bed  of  Menchecourt  and  of  Moulin- 
Quignon  and,  if  a  great  storm  should  come  and  mingle 
these  modern  bones  with  the  hatchets  and  bones  of  ele- 
phants, our  grandchildren  would  find  them   all   mixed  to- 


FiG.  10. 


Fig.  11. 


Flint  Hatchets. 


gether,  and  yet  the  men  of  to-day  are  not  contemporaneous 
with  the  hatchets  you  see  before  you. 

The  objection  was  all  the  stronger  for  having  been 
advanced,  as  I  have  said,  by  the  highest  authorities  in 
Geology.  This  is  why  I  attach  such  importance  to  the 
facts  for  which  we  are  indebted  to  M.  Lartet,  and  which 
entirely  refute  these  conjectures. 

M.  Lartet  studied  at  Aurignac,  in  the  south  of  France, 


THE  ANTIQUITY   OF  MAN.  43 

a  burial-place  of  these  remote  times.  It  is  a  grotto  ex- 
cavated in  the  side  of  a  hill,  at  a  height  which  is  not  at- 
tained by  water-courses  analogous  to  those  of  which  we 
find  the  trace  in  the  neighborhood  of  Abbeville.  This 
sepulchral  grotto  at  the  time  of  discovery  was  closed  by  a 
slab  taken  from  a  bed  of  rocks  at  some  distance  from  this 
point.  In  the  interior  were  found  the  bones  of  seventeen 
persons,  men,  women,  and  children  ;  and  before  the  entrance, 
the  well-attested  remains  of  a  fireplace.  There  were  traces 
of  funeral  repasts  that  the  first  inhabitants  of  our  country 
were  in  the  habit  of  making,  and  such  as  we  sometimes 
find  in  our  own  day  among  certain  European  people.  In 
the  ashes  of  this  fireplace  were  found  bones  scorched  by 
fire,  and  excrements  of  wild  animals.  These  bones  were 
those  of  the  bear  and  rhinoceros.  The  excrements  be- 
longed to  a  species  of  hyena  contemporaneous  with  the 
preceding  animals.  Here,  consequently,  man  appears  as 
eating  the  animals  in  question ;  as  making  his  repast  of 
those  very  animals  whose  contemporaneousness  with  him 
had  been  disputed. 

M.  Lartet  crowned  these  beautiful  researches  by  dis- 
covering in  a  cave,  in  the  centre  of  France,  a  piece  of  ivory 
(Fig.  12)  on  which  was  unmistakably  represented  the  very 
mammoth  to  which  I  have  just  called  your  attention.  It 
is  very  evident  that  it  could  only  be  made  by  a  man  who 
lived  at  the  same  time  with  this  elephant. 

In  view  of  M.  Lartet's  discoveries,  we  must  admit  the 
existence  of  fossil  man,  that  is  to  say,  the  coexistence  of 
our  species  with  the  lost  species  of  animals  of  which  I  have 
spoken. 

Since  this  epoch,  besides,  we  have  not  only  found  traces 
of  these  primitive  industries,  but  debris  of  jawbones,  and 
entire  crania.  Hence  we  can  judge  of  the  characters  which 
distinguished  our  first  ancestors.  Strange  to  tell,  we  find 
that  these  men  who,  even  in  France,  warred  with  stone 


44  THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

weapons  sucli  as  I  have  shown  you,  against  the  elephant 
and  the  rhinoceros,  have  still  at  the  present  day  in  Europe 
descendants  presenting  the  same  characters. 

So  man  lived  in  the  Quaternar}'-  epoch.  May  we  go 
further,  and  admit  that  he  also  existed  during  the  Tertiary 
epoch  ?  Was  he  contemporaneous,  not  only  with  the  rhi- 
noceros and  mammoth,  of  which  I  have  spoken,  but  also 
with  earlier  mammals  ? 

The  question  is  perhaps  still  premature.  Some  facts 
seem  to  indicate  that  it  is  so ;  but  in  such  ipatters  it  is 
better  to  adjourn  conviction  than  to  admit  ojoinions  that 
are  yet  in  doubt.  Consequently,  we  shall  regard  the  de- 
bate as  remaining  open. 

After  demonstrating  that  man  goes  back  in  geologic 
time  to  an  epoch  much  anterior  to  that  in  which  we 
formerly  believed,  we  are  naturally  led  to  ask  if  it  is  pos- 
sible to  estimate  in  figures  this  antiquity  of  our  species. 
We  are  obliged  up  to  the  present  time  to  answer,  No. 
We  can  perfectly  establish  relative  epochs  ;  but  we  cannot 
judge  of  the  number  of  years  that  each  of  these  epochs 
represents. 

This,  however,  has  been  attempted.  From  calculations 
of  the  time  required  to  form  a  bed  of  peat,  some  have 
attempted  to  compute  the  duration  of  certain  periods, 
of  the  age  of  stone,  of  the  age  of  bronze,  and  of  the  age 
of  iron. 

But  the  results  have  been  so  discordant  as  to  throw 
doubt  upon  the  method.  Then  the  accumulations  of  debris 
thrown  up  by  torrents  of  the  Alps  have  been  studied,  and, 
in  particular,  the  one  known  under  the  name  of  the  cone 
of  Tinniere.  A  railroad  has  cut  through  these  materials, 
which  have  probably  been  accumulating  ever  since  the  com- 
mencement of  the  present  epoch,  and  in  the  cut  there  have 
been  found  debris  reaching  back  in  one  case  to  the  Gallo- 
Roman  epoch,  in  others  to  the  Roman  epoch — these  to  the 


Fin.  12. 


gketch  of  Fossil  MamTnoth  on  Ivon',  found  among-  Cave  Relics. 


46  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

epocli  of  iron,  those  to  that  of  bronze,  and,  finally,  to  the 
epoch  of  stone. 

As  we  know  the  duration  of  some  of  these  periods,  it 
has  been  thought  possible  by  a  simple  proportion,  taking 
account  of  the  thickness  of  the  beds,  to  go  back  to  the 
time  of  the  first  formation  of  the  cone.  But  here,  again, 
I  repeat,  the  results  are  so  uncertain  that  we  do  not  give 
them  any  serious  confidence. 

We  cannot,  then,  give  precise  figures.  Yet,  from  all 
these  researches,  and  from  arch^ologic  facts  not  less  de- 
monstrated, it  results  that  it  is  necessary  to  go  back  much 
further  than  we  have  been  accustomed  to,  in  seeking  for 
the  advent  of  man  upon  the  earth.  Let  me  cite  you  just 
one  of  these  proofs. 

You  were  at  the  Universal  Exposition — probably  you 
entered  the  Egyptian  Temple.  At  the  bottom  of  the  hall, 
facing  the  entrance,  you  saw  a  statue — that  of  King 
Cephren.  This  statue  goes  back  something  like  four 
thousand  years  before  our  era.  Consequently,  it  was* 
sculptured  about  six  thousand  years  ago.  Now",  you  may 
know  that  the  work  was  very  difficult,  for  the  stone  of 
which  it  is  made  is  very  hard.  The  statue  is  remarkably 
perfect.  From  this,  as  well  as  from  other  data,  we  learn 
that  in  Egypt,  six  thousand  years  ago,  civilization  was  al- 
ready  much  advanced.  We  must,  therefore,  date  back  the 
origin  of  the  Egyptians  more  than  six  thousand  years. 
But  we  shall  presently  see  that  Egypt  was  not  the  first 
inhabited  country.  Man  must  have  come  there  from  his 
original  home.  Consequently,  his  first  appearance  on  the 
globe  will  be  found  much  more  remote  in  time. 

So  we  are  now  certain  of  the  existence  of  Quaternary 
man ;  we  already  suspect  the  existence  of  Tertiary  man, 
and  it  is  in  France  that  the  discoveries  which  led  to  these 
conclusions  were  made. 

Is  it,  then,  in  our  country,  in  the  vicinity  of  Abbeville, 


THE   ANTIQUITY   OF   MAN.  47 

or  of  Aiirignac,  that  man  first  appeared?  Now,  he  is 
found  everywhere:  did  he  arise  everywhere?  or  was  his 
original  abode  at  some  particular  point  of  the  globe,  and 
did  he  afterward  disperse  in  all  directions  ?  If  this  be  so, 
where  is  the  privileged  spot  which  gave  him  birth  ?  Such 
are  the  questions  that  arise  after  that  of  the  antiquity  of  man. 

There  has  been  much  discussion  on  these  questions. 
It  has  been  said,  and  some  still  say,  that  men  have  origi- 
nated where  we  find  them.  But  a  more  careful  study,  a 
more  profound  knowledge  of  the  laws  that  regulate  organic 
and  living  beings,  leads  to  the  opposite  conclusion. 

Observe  that  here  we  can  no  longer  appeal  to  the  sci- 
ences which  hitherto  have  served  as  our  guide.  Anatomy 
and  physiology  teach  us  nothing  concerning  the  place  of 
man's  origin,  his  first  dispersion,  or  his  original  home.  It 
is  all  the  same  with  regard  to  physiology,  whether  man  ap- 
peared at  a  single  point,  or  whether  he  appeared  at  several 
points  at  the  same  time.  To  study  these  questions  we 
must  interrogate  another  order  of  ideas  and  facts,  but  with- 
out on  that  account  changing  the  method.  We  must  al- 
ways recur  to  other  organized  and  living  beings.  It  is  to 
botanical  and  zoological  geography  that  we  now  appeal. 

Plants  and  animals  are  not  distributed  by  chance  upon 
the  earth.  Their  distribution  is  subject  to  precise  laws; 
and,  because  living  and  organic  beings  in  general  obey  the 
same  laws,  man  ought  to  follow  the  laws  of  geography  as 
well  as  animals  and  plants. 

Now,  these  laws  of  botanical  and  zoological  geography 
teach  us  that,  in  certain  parts,  the  flora  and  fauna  are  char- 
acterized by  certain  species ;  that  the  globe  is  partitioned 
off  into  a  certain  number  of  provinces  that  have  their  par- 
ticular vegetables  and  animals.  These  provinces  have  been 
called  centres  of  creation. 

It  is  natural  enough  to  ask  if  each  centre  of  creation  has 
not  had  its  own  particular  man,  as  it  has  had  its  peculiar 


48  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

vegetables  and  its  peculiar  animals.  Led  astray  by  cer- 
tain coincidences,  more  apparent  than  real,  some  natu- 
ralists have  replied  in  the  affirmative.  But,  whoever  will 
examine  the  question  closely,  will  find  that  it  is  an  error ; 
for  this  mode  of  reasoning  makes  man  a  single  exception 
among  all  organic  and  living  beings.  Now,  you  know  we 
do  not  admit  this  to  be  possible.  Man  ought  to  obey  the 
laws  of  geography  as  he  obeys  the  laws  of  physiology. 

I  cannot  enter  into  all  the  details  required  for  the  com- 
plete demonstration  of  this  statement,  but  limit  myself  to 
two  facts  that  I  hope  will  suffice  to  convince  you. 

The  first  is :  not  a  single  species  of  vegetable,  not  a 
single  species  of  animal,  is  found  at  the  same  time  all  over 
the  globe. 

The  most  wide-spread  species  occupied  at  first  only  a 
small  part  of  the  earth,  and  man  must  have  carried  with 
him  not  onlj^  certain  vegetables  but  also  certain  animals,  to 
find  them  as  widely  diffused  as  they  are  in  our  day.  Not- 
withstanding this  intelligent  and  voluntary  intervention, 
you  well  know  that  there  are  certain  parts  of  the  globe 
occupied  by  man  in  which  neither  the  vegetables  that  have 
accompanied  us  almost  everywhere,  nor  the  animals  which 
we  habitually  transport,  can  survive.  Man,  on  the  con- 
trary, is  cosmopolitan  in  every  sense  of  the  word ;  that  is 
to  say,  we  find  him  everywhere,  amid  the  ice  of  the  poles, 
as  under  the  equator. 

Hence,  if  he  had  originated  wherever  we  find  him,  he 
would  constitute  a  single  exception  among  all  organic  and 
living  beings,  whether  vegetable  or  animal. 

This  reason,  alone,  ought  to  make  us  accept  at  least 
this  much:  that  man  has,  at  all  events,  peopled  a  part  of 
the  globe  by  emigration. 

But  we  may  go  much  further;  and  always,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  law  I  have  just  stated,  we  may  say  that  he 
had  his  origin  in  one  spot,  and  that  a  narrow  one. 


THE   ANTIQUITY   OF   MAN.  49 

In  fact,  when  we  study  animals,  we  find  that  the  area 
occupied  by  a  species,  what  we  call  its  habitat,  is  as  much 
less  extended  as  the  species  is  more  perfected,  more  ele- 
vated, in  the  zoological  series. 

Not  only  is  this  true  of  species,  but  of  types  themselves. 

Thus,  below  man,  the  animal  form  which  most  reminds 
us  of  the  human  is,  you  know,  that  of  the  monkey.  Are 
monkeys  among  the  number  of  the  most  widely-distributed 
animals?  No.  The  monkey-type  is  found  neither  in  very 
cold  countries  nor  in  the  greater  part  of  the  temperate  re- 
gions, but  only  in  the  warmest  parts  of  the  globe.  Besides, 
a  great  part  of  Oceanica  contains  not  a  single  monkey. 

If,  now,  we  no  longer  consider  the  type,  the  entire 
group  of  monkeys,  but  only  the  species  which  approach 
nearest  to  us,  we  see  them  occupying  an  area  still  more 
limited.  America  has  not  a  single  species  of  monkey  in 
common  with  Africa  and  Asia.  And,  when  we  come  to 
the  most  perfect  monkeys— to  those  which,  by  reason  of 
their  great  resemblance  to  man,  have  been  called  anthro- 
poid, that  is,  with  a  human  form — we  see  the  area  of  their 
habitat  is  restricted  still  more  and  becomes  extremely  nar- 
row. So  the  orang-outang,  which  some  have  wished  to 
make  our  ancestor,  is  found  only  in  the  isle  of  Borneo,  or 
at  most,  perhaps,  in  the  isle  of  Sumatra ;  the  gorilla,  still 
another  of  the  species  which  comes  nearest  man  in  his  gen- 
eral proportions,  occupies  only  a  small  part  of  the  western 
regions  of  Africa. 

Now,  man  is  everyw^here,  and  still  he  is  incontestably, 
even  from  the  point  of  view  of  his  body,  very  superior  to 
the  monkeys.  He  alone  has  true  hands,  those  marvelous 
instruments  which  you  know  so  well  how  to  use  ;  he  alone 
possesses  a  brain  of  which  the  size  of  the  skull  attests  the 
development.  Without  speaking  of  other  characters,  man 
is  evidently  superior  to  all  monkeys  by  his  hand  and  his 
brain. 


50 


THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 


Well,  then,  the  monkey — which,  although  so  distant 
from  man,  still  comes  nearest  to  him — occupies  but  a  re- 
stricted habitat ;  while  man,  the  superior  being  ])ar  excel- 
lence^ has  originated,  vou  say,  simultaneously  everywhere ! 


Native  of  Feejee. 
Black  Race,  Eastern  Branch,  Papuan  Family. 

Evidently,  gentlemen,  to  accept  this  interpretation  of  facts 

will  be  to  make  him  a  single  exception  among  all  organized 

beings ;  and  so,  I  repeat,  we  can  never  accept  this  conclusion. 

You  see,  we  are  led  to  admit,  not  only  that  man  origi- 


THE  ANTIQUITY   OF   MAN.  51 

nated  in  one  single  place  upon  the  globe,  but  further,  that 
this  was  a  limited  region — of  very  small  extent.  It  was 
probably  not  greater  than  the  habitat  now  allowed  either 
to  the  gorillas  or  the  orangs. 

Can  we  go  still  further  ?  Can  we  determine  the  par- 
ticular spot  of  the  globe  w^here  arose  this  privileged  species 
which  was  to  go  forth  and  conquer  the  whole  earth  ?  We 
cannot  answer  this  question  with  the  same  confidence  as 
the  others.  But  we  may  answer  it  with  great  probability. 
According  to  all  appearances,  the  point  where  man  origi- 
nated, and  whence  he  emigrated  to  all  parts  of  the  globe, 
was  situated  somewhere  in  the  centre  of  Asia.* 

The  reasons  which  lead  us  to  this  conclusion  are  of 
many  kinds.     I  can  only  indicate  the  two  following : 

Around  the  elevated  central  region  that  you  see  pict- 
ured upon  the  chart  in  the  heart  of  Asia,  we  find  the  three 
fundamental  types  of  humanity :  the  black  man,  the  yellow 
man,  and  the  white  man.  Black  men  are  at  the  present 
time  widely  enough  dispersed.  We  see  them  still,  how- 
ever, in  the  peninsula  of  Malacca  and  in  the  isles  of  Anda- 
man. Again,  we  find  traces  of  these  blacks  in  the  east  of 
Asia,  at  the  isle  of  Formosa,  at  the  south  of  Japan,  and  in 
the  Philippines  :  the  Melanesia  belong  to  them.  The  yel- 
low race  occupies  almost  all  the  southeast  part  and  even 
the  centre  of  Asia ;  and  finally  we  know  that  from  this 
elevated  central  region  came  the  great  white  race  which 
to-day  rules  everywhere — the  Aryan  race,  that  to  which 
we  belong.  The  groups,  more  or  less  pure,  are  besides  re- 
lated to  each  other  by  a  multitude  of  intermediates  which 
may  be  regarded  as  transitional. 

It  is  not  only  by  the  features,  by  fundamental  physical 
traits,  that  the  men  found  around  this  immense  table-land 
are  interrelated  and  seem  to  blend  into  one  another.  We 
see,  furthermore,  on  the  sides  of  this  vast  table-land,  the 
three  essential  types  of  language— the  most  striking  intel- 
lectual manifestation  of  man. 

*  See  Appendix  F. 


52  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

We  shall  come  to  this  question  by-and-by,  but  to-day  I 
may  say  to  you  that  we  distinguish  three  fundamental  forms 
of  human  language  :  monosyllabic  languages,  in  which  each 
word  has  but  one  syllable ;  agglutinated  languages,  in  which 
the  words  are  welded  together ;  and,  finally,  flexible  lan- 
guages, which  resemble  the  language  now  generally  spoken 
in  Europe. 

Now,  we  find  around  this  central  plateau  of  Asia  the 
monosyllabic  language,  ]jar  excellence^  all  over  the  Chinese 
Empire ;  on  the  north  an  assemblage  of  peoples  speaking 
agglutinative  languages,  and  extending  even  to  Europe. 
Then,  again,  we  have  the  portion  occupied  by  the  Aryan 
race,  speaking  the  flexible  languages.  So  the  three  lin- 
guistic types  are  represented  around  this  table4and  of  Asia 
the  same  as  the  three  fundamental  physical  types.  It 
seems  that,  almost  from  his  cradle,  man  has  presented  all 
the  essential  modifications  that  he  could  undergo. 

I  pass  to  another  question.  Man,  starting  from  a  sin- 
gle and  Hmited  spot,  has  spread  all  over  the  globe.  Conse- 
quently, he  has  peopled  the  globe  by  emigration  and  colo- 
nization. Such  is  the  conclusion  drawn  from  actual  facts 
interjDreted  by  science  alone.  But,  is  it  possible  to  people 
the  earth  by  human  migration  ?  Some  say  no  ;  and  make 
this  assertion  an  objection  to  the  ideas  that  I  have  just 
indicated. 

I  own  that,  for  my  part,  this  has  always  surprised  me. 
Migrations — colonizations !  why,  they  occur  everywhere  in 
history,  and  particularly  in  our  own  history. 

Go  back  as  far  as  we  may,  we  see  populations  in  move- 
ment from  one  end  of  continents  to  the  other  ;  so  that,  to 
say  a  priori  that  man  has  always  lived  where  we  find  him, 
is  to  contradict  all  historical  documents. 

However,  some  have  insisted  that  certain  migrations 
were  beyond  human  power  and  intelligence.  I  will  give 
you  two  examples  to  show  that  migrations  are  always  pos- 


THE  ANTIQUITY   OF   MAN. 


53 


sible,  even  when  the  conditions  in  the  midst  of  which  they 
take  place  seem  made  expressly  to  arrest  them. 

We  must  distinguish,  in  migrations,  those  over  land 
from  those  across  seas. 

As  to  migrations  by  land,  it  is  very  evident  that,  when 

Fia.  14. 


Siamese  Domestic. 
Yellow  Race,  Sinaic  Branch,  Indo-Chinese  Family. 


men  have  to  war  only  against  brute  Nature,  nothing  can 
prevent  their  passage,  especially  when  they  can  choose 
their  moment.     But  I  add  that  men  will  emigrate,  even 


54:  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

when  they  have  to  combat  all  difficulties  united,  not  only 
the  rigors  of  physical  Nature,  but  also  the  action  of  man, 
who  alone  absolutely  arrests  man. 

For  example,  I  will  cite  a  fact  borrowed  from  the  his- 
tory of  the  Cal  mucks  : 

Toward  1616,  according  to  Chinese  dates,  a  horde  of 
these  people,  for  some  reason  Avhich  Ave  do  not  know,  left 
the  country  bordering  upon  China,  crossed  the  whole  of 
Asia,  and  established  themselves  on  the  banks  of  the  Volga. 
There  they  accepted  the  sovereignty  of  Russia,  and  for 
more  than  a  century  rendered  good  service  to  the  empire. 
But  there  came  a  time  when  the  Calmucks  found  that  the 
Russian  yoke  was  growing  more  and  more  oppressive.  To 
throw  it  off,  they  decided  to  emigrate,  and  return  to  the 
country  of  their  ancestors.  The  tribe  had  settled  on  either 
bank  of  the  Volga,  and,  in  order  to  come  together  at  a  de- 
termined place,  it  had  been  arranged  to  start  in  the  dead 
of  winter,  at  a  time  when  the  ice  would  be  strong  enough 
to  allow  the  people  on  the  right  bank  to  gain  the  left  bank 
of  the  river.  On  a  given  day,  all  the  people  of  the  left 
bank  came  together ;  but  some  unknown  cause  hindered 
the  people  of  the  right  bank  from  crossing.  The  number 
of  emigrants  was,  however,  very  considerable,  for,  includ- 
ing women  and  children,  there  were  two  hundred  and  fifty 
thousand.  The  rear-guard  was  comj^osed  of  a  select  body 
of  horsemen,  which  counted  eighty  thousand  men.  You 
see,  here  was  an  emigration  of  an  entire  peojDle. 

From  the  beginning  of  the  journey,  the  leaders  under- 
stood that  they  must  hasten ;  for,  at  the  first  news  of  their 
departure,  the  Russians  gave  orders  to  pursue  the  fugitives. 
A  regular  army  was  soon  organized  and  advancing  up- 
on them,  preceded  by  a  host  of  Cossacks.  These  sworn 
enemies  of  the  Calmucks  massacred  all  tliose  that  strayed 
away  any  distance  from  the  main  body.  Although  it  w^as 
the  oth  of  January,  1771,  when  they  started,  this  entire 


THE   ANTIQUITY   OF  MAN. 


55 


people  traversed  the  intervening  regions,  arriving  on  the 
following  September  on  the  frontiers  of  China. 

In  this  long  journey  of  more  than  700  leagues,  this 
wandering  horde  was  constantly  pursued  by  the  Russian 
army,  obliged  to  advance  always  by  forced  marches,  to 
open  a  passage  through  hostile  countries,  harassed  not 
only  by  the  Cossacks  but  also  by  the  Kirgheez,  and  the 
Bashkeers,  the  most  savage  and  warlike  inhabitants  of  these 
countries,  who  gave  them  not  a  single  moment's  peace. 


Fig.  15. 


Tartak  of  Kasak  (Russian). 
White  Race,  European  Branch,  Slavonic  Family. 

I  forgot  to  say  that  the  winter,  always  very  severe  in 
these  regions,  was  exceptionally  so  at  this  time ;  that  in 
the  first  eight  days  all  the  beasts  of  burden  perished,  and 
that  they  had  to  biun  their  tents  to  obtain  a  moment's 


56  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

warmth.  The  women,  the  children,  the  aged,  and  men  in 
their  vigor,  perished  by  thousands  from  the  cold.  This 
journey  was,  in  reality,  for  these  people,  what  the  retreat 
from  Russia  was  for  the  French  army  ;  but  with  this  differ- 
ence, that  the  Cal  mucks  emigrated  in  families,  with  women 
and  children,  so  that  the  disaster  would  be  much  more  ter- 
rible. Winter  was  followed  by  summer ;  and,  much  as 
they  had  suffered  from  cold,  they  suffered  equally  from 
heat,  and,  above  all,  from  w^ant  of  water.  There  was  even 
a  time  when  the  entire  body  of  Calmucks,  at  the  sight  of 
water,  disbanded  to  quench  the  thirst  that  devoured  them. 
The  rear-guard  itself  yielded  to  the  temptation.  The  Bash- 
keers  and  the  Kirgheez,  taking  advantage  of  this  disorder, 
fell  upon  the  multitude  and  put  them  to  great  slaughter. 
HapiDily,  Kien-Long  was  engaged  in  the  chase  in  these 
parts,  and,  as  is  usual  with  the  Emperors  of  China,  he  was 
accompanied  by  a  real  army,  in  which  were  several  bat- 
teries of  artillery.  He  fired  some  pieces  of  cannon  on  the' 
Kirgheez  and  the  Bashkeers.  The  Calmucks  recovered 
their  coolness,  defended  themselves,  and  all  that  remained 
of  these  people  w^ere  saved.  The  emperor  immediately 
gave  them  food  and  clothing ;  then  he  granted  them  the 
country  which  is  occupied  by  their  descendants  at  the  pres- 
ent time. 

I  will  add  that  Kien-Long  caused  a  column  to  be  erect- 
ed on  the  spot  w^liere  the  encounter  had  taken  place. 
On  this  column  we  read  an  inscription,  in  very  simple 
words,  recording  how  Kien-Long  saved  an  entire  nation. 
The  inscription  ends  with  these  words :  "  Let  this  place 
ever  be  regarded  as  holy."  Gentlemen,  I  cannot  be  de- 
ceived in  saying  that  you  will  join  in  this  prayer  of  one  of 
the  greatest  sovereigns  of  China.  The  place  where  a 
nation  has  been  saved  merits  consecration  much  more  than 
that  where  the  most  brilliant  victory  has  been  gained  at 
the  jDrice  of  thousands  of  human  lives. 


THE   ANTIQUITY   OF   MAN.  57 

The  hour  passes,  and  I  cannot  enlarge  upon  this  inter- 
esting question  of  migration  as  much  as  I  intended.  I  will 
content  myself  with  citing  one  example  of  migration  by 
sea.  It  is  still  more  striking,  as  it  bears  upon  a  race  con- 
stantly referred  to  when  it  is  wished  to  prove  that  men 
were  born  where  we  find  them.  At  the  present  time,  the 
part  of  the  globe  of  which  I  am  about  to  speak  is  one  of 
those  where  the  peopling  by  migration  is  most  completely 
demonstrated.     I  mean  Polynesia. 

It  occupies  a  good  part  of  the  great  Pacific  Ocean,  and 
is  included  in  a  triangle  whose  sides,  from  the  Sandwich 
Islands  to  New  Zealand  and  to  the  isle  of  Paques,  measure, 
in  round  numbers,  eighteen  hundred  leagues.  The  islands 
dispersed  in  this  immense  space  are  scarcely  as  much  as  a 
grain  of  sand  in  the  Place  de  la  Concorde.  Several  among 
them  are  smaller  than  Paris.  The  isle  of  Paques  in  partic- 
ular, w4iich  forms  one  of  the  extremities  of  the  triangle, 
has  precisely  the  extent  of  the  city-wall  of  ancient  Paris  be- 
fore the  annexation  of  the  suburbs — that  is  to  say,  fifteen 
and  a  half  miles  in  circumference. 

You  understand  what  in  this  vast  sea  an  isle  of  these 
dimensions  amounts  to ;  and  there  are  others  much  small- 
er, which  are  likewise  peopled.  The  argument  drawn  from 
this  situation  would  seem,  then,  to  have  great  force.  How 
do  you  suppose,  says  one,  that  savages,  having  no  improved 
means  of  navigation,  have  been  able  to  cross  such  spaces  ? 
Why  were  they  not  lost  in  this  vast  ocean  before  finding 
these  small  isles  ? 

Unfortunately,  I  cannot  go  into  the  detail  of  facts  to 
show  you  how  inexact  is  this  a  priori  reasoning.  I  wall 
only  say  that  at  the  present  time  we  know  not  only  that 
the  people  of  Polynesia  came  from  some  other  place,  but 
that  they  came  from  the  Indian  Archipelago.  We  know, 
besides,  what  has  been  the  general  course  of  their  migra- 
tions, and  can  trace  them  on  the  map.     Further,  we  have 


5S  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

been  able  to  determine  the  epoch  when  they  took  place, 
relying  on  precise  documents,  as  positive  as  the  charts  on 
which  we  depend  in  writing  the  history  of  our  middle 
ages. 

These  people  came  from  Asia,  from  a  point  of  the  Indian 
Archipelago  that  we  can  determine  approximately.  They 
reached  the  Marquesas  Isles  in  the  beginning  of  our  era,  or 
in  the  years  immediately  preceding.  We  knew  with  still 
greater  certainty  that  the  emigration  to  New  Zealand,  that 
is  to  say,  to  the  most  distant  portion  of  Polynesia,  took 
place  in  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  centurj^,  and  that 
the  emigration  from  New  Zealand  to  people  the  Isles  of 
Chatham  occurred  scarcely  a  century  ago. 

Here  we  meet  with  a  significant  fact.  When  these 
emigrants  established  themselves  in  the  islands  of  which 
we  are  speaking,  they  found  them  deserted.  This  circum- 
stance singularly  facilitated  their  new  settlement.  If  the 
Calmucks,  of  whom  I  just  sketched  the  history,  sufi'ered  so 
much,  it  is  because  they  found  men  on  their  route.  In  our 
day,  if  it  is  still  difficult  to  traverse  Africa — if  the  journey 
from  Timbuctoo  has  cost  the  lives  of  so  many  courageous 
travelers — it  is  because  the  Tuaregs  close  the  passage  to 
us. 

The  more  we  study,  the  better  we  know  that  all  over 
the  surface  of  the  globe  man  surmounts  every  difficulty, 
so  long  as  he  wars  only  against  Nature.  If  he  is  arrested, 
it  is  when  he  encounters  man.  In  brief,  man  alone  can 
arrest  man. 

I  wish  to  say  a  few  words  also  on  the  last  of  the  ques- 
tions suggested  by  this  subject. 

Man,  we  have  seen,  took  his  departure  from  a  particu- 
lar place  on  the  globe,  and  now  he  is  everywhere.  Con- 
sequently, in  his  long  and  multiplied  journeyings,  he  has 
encountered  climates  the  most  extreme,  and  conditions  of 
existence  the   most  opposite.     He  has  adapted  himself  to 


THE   ANTIQUITY   OF   MAN.  59 

all.  Does  it  follow  that  a  new-comer,  that  a  European,  for 
example,  can  establish  himself  anywhere  on  the  globe  and 
immediately  prosper  there?  You  know  he  cannot.  He 
must  become  acclimated;  and  you  can  easily  understand 
that  it  must  be  so.  The  human  body,  which  has  developed 
under  certain  conditions  of  existence,  is  in  harmonj^  with 
them.  If  they  change,  and  above  all  if  they  change  sud- 
denly, it  is  evident  that  the  entire  organism  receives  a 
shock ;  and  this  shock  brings  with  it  suffering  that,  you 
know,  often  ends  in  death. 

Experience  has  shown  that  these  suflferings  have  been 
more  grave  and  frequent  when  the  course  of  emigration 
has  been  from  cold  toward  warm  countries — whence  certain 
physicians  and  anthropologists  have  drawn  the  conclusion 
that  there  are  some  countries  on  the  globe  that  the  Eu- 
ropean cannot  inhabit: — in  which  he  can  never  prosper  and 
multiply.  Some  have  even  gone  further.  They  have  main- 
tained that  men  could  only  propagate  where  they  were 
born ;  so  that,  in  reality,  the  Frenchman  can  only  live  in 
France,  the  Englishman  in  England,  the  Dutch  in  Hol- 
land, etc. 

This  exaggeration  needs  no  refutation.  It  is  already 
refuted  by  the  existence  of  our  colonies.  We  know  very 
well  that  there  are  some  parts  of  the  globe  where  the  Euro- 
pean is  acclimated  almost  immediately;  not  that  he  can 
escape  all  sacrifices,  but  they  are  relatively  few.  I  refer 
you  to  the  case  of  Acadia,  that  country  in  Canada  peopled 
by  sixty  French  families,  and  which,  in  a  very  short  time, 
counted  its  inhabitants  by  thousands.  I  may  cite  you  also 
to  what  is  passing  every  day  at  the  Cape,  in  Australia,  at 
Buenos  Ayres. 

You  see,  then,  in  both  w^orlds,  and  under  the  most  di- 
verse climates,  Europeans  prosper,  multiply,  and  work,  as 
they  do  in  Europe.  Still  there  are  places  where  the  ques- 
tion is  much  more  difficult  of  solution,  and  which  have  been 


60  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY    OF   MAN. 

considered  fatal  to  Europeans.  I  will  name  especially,  on 
the  western  coast  of  Africa,  our  colony  of  Senegal,  and 
above  all  that  of  Gaboon ;  I  wdll  point  out,  in  America,  the 
Antilles  generally,  and  consequently  Guadeloupe  and  Mar- 
tinique ;  then  French  Guiana.  Algeria  itself  has  been  a 
subject  of  lively  debate  from  this  point  of  view.  It  will 
seem  natural  to  you  that  I  should  dwell  a  little  more  upon 
this  last  place,  because  of  its  special  interest  for  all  of  us. 

From  the  day  of  our  conquest  the  question  has  been, 
whether  the  French  could  be  acclimated  on  the  soil  of  Al- 
geria ;  and,  curiously  enough,  friends  and  enemies,  English- 
men and  Frenchmen,  military  commanders  and  physicians, 
were  almost  unanimously  agreed  that  it  could  not  be  done. 
They  relied  on  the  tables  of  mortality,  which  showed  an 
excess  of  deaths  over  births.  It  is  easy  to  see  that  a  coun- 
try, where  the  number  of  those  who  die  gains  on  that  of 
those  who  are  born,  is  fated  to  become  depopulated,  unless 
new  immigrants  repair  the  annual  losses.  This  is  what 
was  said  of  Algeria,  and  it  is  one  of  the  points  that  I  have 
had  to  discuss  in  my  lectures. 

Novv,  in  spite  of  documents  so  often  quoted,  I  do  not 
hesitate  to  say  that  Frenchmen  have  been  acclimated  in 
Algeria,  and  have  lived  there  very  well.  To  arrive  at  this 
conclusion  I  have  not  denied  the  figures — the  facts  cited 
by  those  who  reach  the  opposite  one ;  on  the  contrary,  I 
have  accepted  them.  But  I  have  interpreted  them,  resting 
on  this  principle,  which  we  never  abandon,  namely,  that, 
as  regards  his  body,  man  is  an  animal  and  nothing  else. 
Consequently,  if  the  laws  that  govern  animality  bear  heav- 
ily on  him  in  certain  circumstances,  he  profits,  in  return,  by 
advantages  that  these  same  laws  bring  to  animals. 

Now,  before  studying  the  acclimation  of  man,  I  began 
by  studying  the  acclimation  of  plants  and  animals.  This 
study  taught  me  that,  from  the  moment  when  an  organized 
species  changes  its  environment,  be  it  plant,  animal,  or  man, 


THE   ANTIQUITY   OF   MAN.  61 

it  must  be  ready  to  make  two  kinds  of  sacrifices :  sacrifices 
bearing  upon  the  individual,  and  sacrifices  bearing  upon 
the  race.  In  Algeria,  the  former  were  shown  by  the  figures 
of  mortality  of  the  army,  which  were  much  more  consider- 
able than  in  France.  The  latter  were  made  apparent  by 
the  figures  of  mortality  of  children,  which,  in  Algeria,  were 
double  those  of  France. 

But  I  was  aware  that,  when  we  Europeans  tried  to 
transplant  to  America  certain  species  of  domestic  animals, 
the  figures  of  mortality  at  first  were  much  more  consider- 
able than  those  of  the  mortality  of  our  army;  that  the 
figures  of  the  sacrifices  bearing  on  the  race  were  much 
higher  than  those  of  the  mortality  of  children  in  Algiers. 
However,  to-day,  those  animals  are  acclimated  in  America, 
and  prosper  so  well  that  certain  species  have  run  wild,  and 
are,  so  to  speak,  become  indigenous. 

Belying  upon  these  facts,  I  said,  almost  from  the  first 
of  my  lecturing.  The  time  will  come  when  Frenchmen  will 
be  acclimated  in  Algeria. 

The  event  has  justified  me  sooner  than  I  hoped.  Pub- 
lic documents  this  year,  containing  the  quinquennial  cen- 
sus, show,  relatively  to  the  preceding  period,  an  increase 
of  more  than  twenty-five  thousand  souls.  But,  what  is 
more  important,  they  establish  that  this  increase  is  almost 
entirely  due  to  the  excess  of  births  over  deaths. 

So  that  the  sacrifices  of  the  French  in  peopling  Algeria 
already  begin  to  bear  fruit ;  and  certainly  the  time  will 
come  W' hen  that  country,  conquered  by  our  armies,  will  be, 
for  the  descendants  of  our  first  colonists,  as  salubrious  as 
France  is  for  ourselves.  Then  Algeria  will  truly  be  the 
France  of  the  South. 

But  the  sacrifices  which  accompany  colonization  are 
none  the  less  sad,  and  it  is  often  asked  if  there  are  no 
means  of  diminishing  them.  Unhappily,  this  is  always  diffi- 
cult, often  impossible. 


62  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY    OF   MAN. 

However,  here  are  two  facts  that  I  ask  you  to  reflect 
upon  : 

Some  of  our  colonies  have  the  reputation  of  being  par- 
ticularly unhealthy,  and  it  is  said  that  in  them  manual 
labor  is  impossible  for  Europeans.  The  worst  of  these  are 
on  the  western  coast  of  Africa.  Now,  listen  to  the  state- 
ment of  Captain  Bolot,  commanding  a  company  employed 
in  the  construction  of  a  pier  at  Great  Bassam,  made  to 
Captain  Vallon,  from  whom  I  drew  the  fact :  "  A  single 
Sunday  put  more  men  in  the  infirmary  than  three  days  of 
work  under  the  hot  sun."  This  is  because  the  Sunday  was 
given,  not  to  work,  but  to  debauchery. 

Captain  Vallon  profited  by  the  experience  thus  acquired. 
In  his  cruises  to  Gaboon  he  maintained  on  board  his  ship 
severe  discipline  and  regular  work.  When  not  at  sea,  he 
made  the  sailors  of  the  Di  aim  ate  Avork  regularly  in  the  full 
sun,  but  he  forbade  all  excess,  and  in  this  way  he  preserved 
his  own  health  and  that  of  his  crew. 

I  will  give  you  another  and  much  more  important  ex- 
ample, as  it  constitutes  a  true  comparative  experience. 

It  is  another  of  the  colonies  I  referred  to  as  devouring 
Europeans.  I  mean  the  Isle  of  Bourbon,  at  the  east  of 
Madagascar,  almost  under  the  tropics — on  one  of  the  warm- 
est points  of  the  globe. 

The  tables  of  mortality  of  this  island  show  a  frightful 
excess  of  deaths  over  births.  Judged  alone  by  these  tables, 
we  must  admit  that  the  inferences  draw^n  are  perfectly 
justified.  But  these  tables  are  true  only  when  we  take  the 
population  e7i  masse.  Now,  the  people  composing  it  form 
naturally  two  parties.  One  includes  the  great  proprietors, 
the  great  planters,  the  leading  merchants,  and  all  those 
who  belong  to  them,  who,  so  to  speak,  lead  the  life  of 
colonists.  It  is  to  such,  and  to  such  alone,  that  the  deso- 
lating figures  referred  to  apply. 

The  other  part  of  the  population  is  composed  of  people 


THE   ANTIQUITY   OF   MAN.  63 

who  till  the  grouud  with  their  hands,  and  who  are  disdain- 
fully called  by  the  name  of  poor  whites.  These  are  the 
descendants  of  the  first  colonists,  who  were  all  too  poor  to 
buy  slaves,  too  proud  to  enter  into  the  service  of  others, 
and  who  accepted  for  themselves  and  their  posterity  the 
life  of  small  farmers.  This  last  population  keeps  very 
much  by  itself;  it  has  multiplied,  and  not  only  become  pros- 
perous, but  its  physical  type  has  improved  so  much  that 
travelers  all  speak  of  the  personal  beauty,  both  of  the  men 
and  the  women,  of  this  race. 

So,  ill  this  same  Isle  of  Bourbon,  the  rich  planters,  and 
the  working-men  in  cities,  perish  from  the  life  of  excess 
and  debauchery,  for  which  they  are  too  much  inclined  in 
the  colonies.  The  poor  whites,  who  devote  themselves  to 
the  cultivation  of  the  earth,  which  is  said  to  be  imjDossible 
for  the  European  under  the  tropics,  have  continued  to 
develop,  and  have  gained  in  all  respects,  because  they  have 
joined  to  moderate  labor  a  sober  life  and  pure  manners. 

Gentlemen,  there  is  in  this  fact  a  practical  lesson.  Per- 
haps some  among  you  will  leave  France ;  perhaps  you  will 
go  to  the  colonies  or  to  Algeria  to  seek  your  fortune  !  Let 
me  impress  upon  you  the  history  of  the  poor  whites  of  the 
Isle  of  Bourbon — they  have  found  that,  to  maintain  health 
of  the  body,  one  of  the  best  means,  undoubtedly,  is  to  pre- 
serve the  health  of  the  soul. 


LECTURE  in. 

ON   THE    OEIGIN    OF   MAN. 

Gentlemen:  We  meet  in  this  hall,  jou  know,  to  speak 
of  man.  I  have  already  given  two  lectures  here  on  the 
history  of  our  species,  and  intend  to  give  several  more  up- 
on the  same  subject.  You  will  not  be  surprised  that  the 
study  of  the  human  species,  lightly  as  we  may  touch  upon  it, 
requires  several  lectures  ;  for  it  includes  all  organic  beings. 
Although  man  is  superior  not  only  to  plants  chained  to  the 
soil,  but  to  all  the  animals  that  move  upon  the  surface  of 
the  globe,  yet,  like  plants  and  animals,  he  is  a  living  organ- 
ism. Hence  he  is  subject  to  all  the  laws  of  organization 
and  life.  By  his  body  he  is  an  animal,  nothing  more,  noth- 
ing less ;  and  so  he  must  obey  all  the  laws  of  animalit}^ 
For  this  reason,  whenever  a  difficult  question  presents  it- 
self, which  cannot  be  resolved  by  the  direct  study  of  man, 
we  have  recourse  to  indirect  study.  We  then  apply  not 
only  to  the  history  of  animals,  but  also  to  that  of  vegeta- 
bles, to  reach  conclusions  concerning  man  himself. 

This  is  evidently  the  only  scientific  procedure ;  we 
have  followed  it  so  far,  and  we  shall  remain  true  to  it. 

Let  us  first  glance  at  the  questions  already  examined, 
and  the  answers  given. 

The  first  occupied  an  entire  lecture.  We  asked  if  there 
was  one  or  several  species  of  men.  Our  conclusion  was, 
that  the  human  species  is  single.     Comparative  physiology 


ON   THE   ORIGIN   OF   MAN.  65 

teaches  that,  in  spite  of  the  diversity  joresented  by  different 
human  groups,  everywhere  men  remain  men,  as  dogs  re- 
main dogs  ;  as  cattle  remain  cattle  ;  as  horses  remain 
horses ;  notwithstanding  differences  of  figure,  color,  pro- 
portions, etc. 

This  question  is  fundamental ;  for,  according  to  the  an- 
swer given,  we  encounter  in  our  path,  or  rather,  we  leave 
on  one  side,  a  certain  number  of  other  very  important  ques- 
tions. 

We  devoted  the  second  lecture  to  some  of  these  ques- 
tions, but  we  studied  them  more  briefly. 

We  asked  first,  when  man  appeared  on  the  earth. 
Guided  by  recent  investigations,  we  replied  to  this  question, 
which  was  till  lately  regarded  as  insoluble.  We  affirmed 
that  man  existed  in  France,  in  the  neighborhood  of  Paris, 
at  the  same  time  with  the  elephant  and  the  rhinoceros; 
and  that,  consequently,  fossil  man,  whose  existence  was 
universally  denied  till  within  twelve  or  fifteen  years,  is  a 
sure  reality. 

We  then  asked  if  the  human  species  appeared  simul- 
taneously or  successively  on  the  different  parts  of  th^ 
globe  where  it  is  found  to-day.  Always  relying  on  the 
study  of  animals  and  vegetables,  but  appealing  to  geogra- 
phy and  not  to  physiology,  we  concluded  that  he  must  have 
appeared  on  a  single pomt  of  the  globe — on  a  very  circum- 
scribed area,  an  inconsiderable  space  of  the  earth's  surface. 

We  were  able  to  go  much  further,  and,  without  dwelling 
long  on  the  proofs,  we  succeeded  in  determining  with 
great  probability  the  favored  region  where  arose  the  human 
species,  which  was  afterward  to  spread  and  dominate  every- 
where. We  showed,  according  to  all  probability,  that  the 
centre  of  human  creation  was  toward  the  middle  of  Asia. 
As  man  appeared  on  a  particular  spot  of  the  globe,  and 
is  to-day  everyv/here^  having  overrun  the  earth  in  all  di- 
rections, he    must  have  emigrated  from  his  first  country, 


66  THE   NATURAL   HISTOKY   OF   MAN. 

and  traveled  to  those  lie  inhabits  at  the  present  time. 
The  partisans  of  the  plurality  of  the  human  species,  the 
polygenecists,  have  singularly  exaggerated  the  difficulties 
of  these  emigrations,  and  have  thus  sought  to  make  an  ar- 
gument against  mo7io genesis.  In  reply  we  cited  only  the 
emigration  of  the  Calmucks  and  the  voyages  of  the  Poly- 
nesians. These  two  examples  suffice  to  show  that  emigra- 
tions, combining  all  the  conditions  that  render  success  most 
difficult,  have  ended  well  even  in  our  day. 

Finally,  in  the  immense  journeyings  of  the  human  race, 
from  its  birthplace  to  all  the  other  lands  it  now  occupies, 
it  has  encountered  all  possible  conditions  of  existence.  It 
has  had  to  become  acclimated  everywhere,  among  polar 
colds  as  well  as  in  the  burning  winds  of  the  tropics.  We 
established  the  possibility  of  this  acclimation  of  the  race  as 
well  as  of  its  emigrations.  We  then  showed  by  examples 
that  the  difficulty  was  much  exaggerated,  and  that,  if  all 
acclimation  in  a  very  different  climate  from  that  before  oc- 
cupied required  sacrifices  of  individuals,  and  even  of  gen- 
erations, it  is  not  less  true  that,  in  a  certain  time,  races  the 
Most  different  can  be  acclimated  and  prosper  in  the  most 
ojDposite  climates.  Algeria  furnishes  a  near  and  very  strik- 
ing example.  But  we  cited  others,  and  one  of  them  enabled 
us  to  refer  to  a  grave  consideration  too  often  overlooked — 
the  influence  of  the  moral  health  on  the  health  of  the 
body. 

Such,  gentlemen,  are  the  points  in  the  history  of  man 
that  we  have  already  examined. 

To-day  we  enter  upon  a  question  put  by  the  most  un- 
cultivated tribes,  as  well  as  the  most  civilized  peoples  ;  so 
profoundly  does  it  concern  the  inmost  nature  of  man. 
Whence  came  man?  How  did  he  come  to  be  upon  the 
earth  ?  How  happens  it  that  during  incalculable  periods 
we  find  no  trace  of  him  on  the  globe,  and  at  other  epochs 
he  is  everywhere  ?     This  question,  I  repeat,  has  been  pro- 


Fig.  16. 


Lady  of  Cairo  (Eg}  ptian). 
White  Race,  Aramean  Branch. 


68  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

pounded  in  all  times ;  it  has  occupied  the  most  savage 
tribes  and  the  most  enlightened  nations.  It  has  always 
been  answered  in  the  name  of  dogma  and  religion ;  but 
this  is  a  ground  absolutely  denied  us,  and  we  must  look 
elsewhere. 

Science  has  also  put  this  question,  and  has  tried  to  an- 
swer it  with  scientific  data  alone.  Has  it  succeeded  ?  I 
hesitate  not  to  answer,  No,  it  cannot,  and  I  think  you  can 
easily  understand  why. 

Let  us  distinctly  state  the  case  in  all  its  breadth  ;  for, 
here,  as  elsewhere,  we  cannot  separate  man  from  the  rest 
of  the  organized  and  living  creation. 

The  successive  appearance  of  vegetables  and  animals, 
and  of  man,  on  the  surface  of  the  globe,  is  a  fact.  This  is 
attested  by  geology.  Thanks  to  this  science,  we  have  the 
right  of  affirming  that  at  a  certain  epoch  no  organized  being 
could  live  on  the  surface  of  the  globe  ;  that  there  came  a 
time  when  the  globe  could  be  occupied  by  certain  vege- 
tables, by  certain  animals  ;  that  it  afterward  passed  into  a 
state  which  permitted  the  appearance  of  birds,  of  mammals, 
and  then  of  man.  What  has  produced  this  succession 
of  appearances?  Whence  came  the  beings  that  some- 
times suddenly  appear  where  nothing  seem.ed  to  exist 
before  ? 

Again  I  say  these  questions  are  unanswerable,  at  least 
at  the  present  time.  We  find  these  organized  and  liv- 
ing beings  existing,  and,  if  we  see  them  multiply,  it  is  al- 
ways by  the  way  of  filiation.  They  ahvays  have  a  father 
and  a  mother.  But  who  ever  saw  the  first  father  and  the 
first  mother?  We  do  not  know  by  what  process  they 
were  formed,  or,  if  you  like  it  better,  what  phenomena 
have  preceded  and  accompanied  their  birth.  The  phenom- 
ena— the  processes  which  support  the  existence  of  a  soul,  or 
even  of  a  body — are  very  different  from  those  which  pro- 
duced this  soul  or  this  body.     The  phenomena  which  led 


ON   THE   ORIGIN   OF   MAN.  69 

to  the  appearance  of  animals  and  vegetables  were  very  cer- 
tainly any  thing  but  those  which  sustain  them. 

This  proposition  is  perhaps  a  little  abstract,  and  some 
of  you  may  not  seize  it  at  first.     Let  us  take  an  example  : 

Without  doubt,  there  are  among  you  clock-makers, 
mechanics  ;  in  any  case,  whatever  you  are,  you  handle  in- 
struments of  iron  and  steel.  Well,  you  can  understand  that 
we  may  know  perfectly  the  watch  in  our  hands,  may  be  capa- 
ble of  taking  it  to  pieces  to  detect  the  slightest  defect  in 
the  works,  of  cleaning  it,  of  combining  it  again,  and  not 
know  at  all  where  the  metal  came  from  that  enters  into 
its  composition,  nor  how  the  wheel-work  was  made.  Noth- 
ing in  the  study  of  the  watch  indicates  how  the  metals 
composing  it  were  taken  from  the  earth ;  how  a  material 
that  once  resembled  stone  was  transformed  into  this  some- 
thing we  call  a  metal.  And,  unless  we  have  been  em- 
ployed in  steel  manufacture,  we  cannot  know  how  iron  is 
changed  to  steel,  how  it  is  made  capable  of  receiving  what 
w^e  call  temper.  Consequently,  the  watch-maker,  unless  he 
has  gone  elsewhere  for  instruction,  does  not  understand 
the  manufacture  of  the  mainspring  which  gives  movement 
to  the  whole  watch. 

In  the  case  of  vegetables  and  animals,  of  organized 
beings  in  general,  we  are  in  the  same  position  as  the  watch- 
maker who  knows  only  watch-making.  We  can,  to  be  sure, 
study  plants,  animals,  and  man,  from  the  point  of  view  of 
anatomy  and  physiology,  can  know  the  organs  and  give  an 
account  of  the  functions,  but  this  study  does  not  enlighten 
us  concerning  the  origin  of  these  complex  and  marvelous 
machines.  We  are  in  the  position  of  the  watch-maker  who 
knows  only  his  watches ;  and,  unhappily,  we  have  not  yet 
found  the  school  where  we  can  go  to  learn  the  equivalent 
of  what  the  w\atch-maker  and  mechanic  can  learn  at  the 
conservatory  of  arts  and  trades. 

I  repeat,  nobody  has  yet  seen  the  first  appearing  of  any 


AUSTRALIAN. 


CHRYSOTHRIX. 


GORILLA. 


w    o    fe    «*    CI. 

C    o  ->^  ^  "^ 

-2     "     re     "^    2 

-S  •£  -S        S 

S    2    O  -g  -2  c^ 

o  -s  ^  S  ^  un 

^1     E.I  a 

c  --5  5^1  ^ 
•^  .S  ^  1  •-  -^ 
^^  o  I  ^  I 

■^   o  ^   fl   ^  o 

c  .a  ^  3  w  ■S 

K  H  -g  .-  --  ^^ 
"•"I  "3  o  S  5  a 

^  ^  °'-'  s  ^  s 

!>  ^  X  O  o  => 
S    c    "^    c    CI,  b    O) 

3  -5  ^  -3  o  o  Si 

o  >   ^  g  g  8  o 

-a   o   o  <i>  ^  -^ 

■^  ^  -fi  t,    o  ** 

CjH   ^   *-  rt  -C  O  _rt 

<=  fcc  £  s  ^  f  :g 

?:.£    ?;H    £.§    fl 

.2   =*   -   c:  -r;  E  ,o 
g  g-  5  c^  >  •-  o 

o   o   „  '3  .S?  -£3 

o  o-i  "  St 

M    ^     &     O     CJ  , 


ON   THE   ORIGIN   OF   MAN.  71 

organized  being  whatever.  Men  of  merit  and  undeniable 
good  faith  believe  that  they  have  produced  organic  beings 
complete  in  all  their  parts — microscopic  vegetables,  and  ani- 
mals. This  is  called  spontaneous  generation.  But  these 
experiments  have  failed  whenever  they  have  been  repeated 
with  proper  precautions  to  prevent  the  introduction  of 
germs  which  float  constimtly  about  us.  More  than  ever 
we  can  say  that  this  is  so,  for  over  and  over  again  the 
question  has  been  revived,  and  now  it  has  come  up  again 
apparently  supported  by  irrefutable  proofs,  and  once  more 
the  errors  of  its  defenders  have  been  made  manifest. 

Let  us  own  it,  then,  frankly,  and  without  false  shame; 
we  yet  know  nothing  of  the  way  by  which  organic  beings 
came  to  exist  on  the  surface  of  the  globe. 

I  am  not  afraid,  gentlemen,  thus  to  avow  our  incompe- 
tence. Mistrust  the  men  who  pretend  to  explain  every 
thing:  gen eralW,  they  are  the  ones  who  know  the  least. 
You  never  find  a  true  philosopher  who  hesitates  to  say, 
"  I  know  not."  At  any  rate,  this  is  what  I  am  obliged  to 
say  to  you  at  this  time. 

So,  gentlemen,  science  cannot  say  whence  came  man ; 
but  it  can  tell  you  whence  he  did  not  come.  It  is  some- 
thing that  it  can  judge,  and  judge  with  certainty,  of  some 
of  the  hypotheses  that  have  been  put  forth  under  the  guise 
of  science  to  explain  our  advent  upon  the  globe. 

These  hypotheses  are  widely  different  from  each  other, 
but  for  the  most  part  there  is  a  general  likeness  among 
them,  to  wit :  that  man  is  nothing  but  a  transformed  and 
pefected  animal ;  that  he  descended,  by  way  of  trans- 
formation, from  animals  that  existed  before  him.  In  our 
day  especially  it  is  said,  "  Man  is  descended  from  the 
monkey." 

You  see  this  human  head,  and  these  heads  of  the  species 
of  monkey  called  anthropomorphic  (Fig,  17) ;  that  is  to 
say,  monkeys  in  human  form,  because  in  certain  respects 


72  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

they  approach  very  near  us.  You  may  yourselves  judge, 
at  a  glance,  that  in  all  these  instances,  and  taking  account 
only  of  the  most  important  part,  the  head,  the  transfor- 
mations must  have  been  at  least  ver}^  considerable. 

Although  this  theory  is  reproduced  to-day  under  diverse 
forms,  it  is  any  thing  but  new.  For  a  long  time  men  have 
wished  to  explain  themselves  by  animals.  We  find  the 
same  idea  even  among  many  savage  tribes.  When  they 
come  to  speak  of  their  history,  we  shall  find  they  claim  to 
be  descendants  of  bears,  of  beavers,  etc.,  and  some  of  them 
have  also  thought,  of  monkeys.  Some  have  even  seen  in 
the  orang  a  sort  of  brother,  who  preserves  silence  that  he 
may  not  be  compelled  to  work. 

Among  savages,  traditions  wrongly  interpreted,  and  of 
which  the  true  sense  is  lost,  have  given  rise  to  these  ideas. 
With  us  it  is  in  the  name  of  science  that  the  descent  of 
man  from  an  animal  species  has  been  sustained.  We  find 
traces  of  this  hypothesis  in  Greek  philosophy,  but  it  was 
not  clearly  formulated  till  quite  recently.  About  the  mid- 
dle of  the  last  century,  in  1755,  a  Frenchman,  De  Mailiet, 
published  a  work  to  show  that  all  terrestrial  and  aerial  ani- 
mals came  from  transformed  marine  animals.  He  gave, 
as  the  ancestors  of  men,  the  tritons  of  the  ancient  fables, 
the  mermen  spoken  of  in  the  legends  of  the  middle  ages, 
and  seemed  even  to  wish  to  establish  their  filiation  to 
fishes. 

A  little  after  the  publication  of  the  "  Telliamed  "  of  De 
Mailiet,  an  Englishman,  Lord  Monboddo,  a  distinguished 
antiquary,  published  a  curious  book  in  many  respects,  on 
the  origin  of  language,  in  which  he  attempted  to  show  that 
civilized  man  is  only  the  man  of  the  woods  (orang)  per- 
fected (1774). 

In  his  "Zoological  Philosophy  "  (1809),  our  great  natu- 
ralist, Lamarck,  maintained  that  all  animals  are  derived 
from  less  complex  animals  by  way  of  transformation  ;  and, 


ON   THE   ORIGIN   OF   MAN.  73 

especially,  lie  tried  to  show  liow  lie  could  conceive  that 
man  had  as  ancestor  some  one  of  the  flighly-organizcd 
monkeys.  It  is  this  idea  which  is  at  the  present  time  re- 
produced and  upheld  by  new  arguments  drawn  from  the 
progress  of  science. 

At  bottom,  this  view  of  the  origin  of  our  species  is  but 
a  particular  application  of  a  more  complete  and  general 
doctrine  which  has  been  put  forth  in  England  by  a  natu- 
ralist of  great  ability',  Mr.  Charles  Darwin.  We  must, 
therefore,  say  something  of  this  doctrine.  I  will  go  over  it 
as  rapidly  as  possible. 

Darwin,  having  to  give  account  of  the  origin  of  species, 
supposes  that  originally  there  existed,  so  to  speak,  but  a 
single  organized  being,  which  he  calls  an  archetype.  In 
consequence  of  the  action  exerted  upon  it  by  its  conditions 
of  existence,  this  type  was  modified  more  and  more ;  and 
these  successive  modifications  gave  birth,  by  way  of  trans- 
formation, to  all  the  animal  and  vegetable  species  that  wc 
find  on  the  surface  of  the  globe. 

By  a  very  simple  illustration  I  will  give  you  an  idea  of 
the  way  in  which  Darwin  understands  this  transformation. 
Let  us  represent  by  a  point  the  first  ty2:)e.  For  a  time  this 
type  will  give  birth  to  beings  which  will  more  or  less  re- 
semble it,  will  have  nothing  that  will  sharply  distinguish 
them  one  from  another.  We  may  trace  a  white  line  to 
indicate  this  first  interval.  Then  at  a  given  moment,  and 
under  the  influence  of  the  particular  conditions  of  existence 
in  which  they  find  themselves  placed — under  the  empire 
of  what  Darwin  calls  the  struggle  for  existence  and  natural 
selectio7i — the  characters  of  these  beings  change  little  by 
little ;  differences  more  and  more  marked  appear  and  give 
rise  to  distinct  groups  that  I  will  represent  by  two  diverg- 
ing lines,  one  red  the  other  blue.  In  their  turn  these  two 
secondary  types  will  in  the  same  way  be  more  or  less  modi- 
fied, will  give  rise  to  new  distinct  groups,  that  we  can  again 


74  THE   NATURAL   HISTOEY   OF   MAN. 

represent  by  lines  diverging  from  the  preceding  ones. 
These  lines,  moi%  and  more  multiplied  and  diverging  in  all 
directions,  end  by  forming  a  kind  of  tree  in  which  the  last 
branches  represent  the  beings,  or  the  groups  of  beings 
which  are  most  removed  from  the  primitive  archetype. 

YoLi  will  remark — and  it  is  this  which  makes  the  theory 
of  Darwin  so  seductive — you  will  remark,  I  say,  that  when 
a  being  has  started  in  one  direction  it  cannot  take  another. 
From  the  red  type  there  can  arise  only  secondary,  tertiary, 
quaternary  types,  resembling  more  less  the  first  parent. 
Take  an  example.  Compare  a  part  of  our  theoretic  tree 
with  what  we  see  in  zoological  classification.  A  common 
type,  the  type  of  vertebrates,  has  given  the  four  secondary 
types — fishes,  reptiles,  birds,  and  mammals — like  the  main 
branch  which  here  gives  off  four  secondary  branches. 

Now,  in  the  same  way  that  each  of  these  branches  gives 
off  other  branches,  which  again  subdivide  and  ramify,  so 
each  of  the  classes  that  I  have  just  named  has  its  particular 
types  which  can  never  pass  to  one  of  a  neighboring  class. 
From  a  fish,  according  to  Darwin  there  will  never  spring  a 
mammal  and  mce  versa. 

Notwithstanding  the  device  by  which  we  have  attempt- 
ed to  illustrate  these  abstract  ideas,  they  are  still,  perhaps, 
a  little  difficult  for  some  of  you.  I  will  try  to  make  them 
plainer  by  a  rough  comparison  which  will  serve  to  convey 
my  thought. 

You  all  know  that  great  school  which  is  one  of  the  glo- 
ries of  France — the  Polytechnic  School.  You  know  the 
pupils  enter  this  institution  on  leaving  the  Lyceum,  and  af- 
ter passing  an  examination.  Here  they  all  receive  a  certain 
number  of  general  scientific  notions.  Their  minds  are  given 
one  impress;  they  are  developed  and  enlarged  ;  individual 
differences  of  course  exist ;  but,  upon  the  whole,  taken  en 
masse,  they  get  the  same  degree  of  instruction,  and  instruc- 
tion of  the  same  nature.     On  leaving  the  school,  what  hap- 


i?ia.  18. 


A  Young  Chinese. 
Yellow  Kacc,  Chinese  Family. 


76    •  THE  NATURAL  HISTORY  OF  MAN. 

pens  ?  Some  jDursue  a  military  career,  others  civil  careers, 
and,  once  entered  on  these  careers,  they  are  differentia4;ed 
more  and  more  in  proportion  to  their, progress. 

Moreover,  they  never  swerve  from  the  course  on  which 
they  enter.  No  matter  how  high  they  rise,  they  Avill  not 
pass  from  one  career  to  another.  The  pupil  of  the  school 
of  3Ietz  will  no  longer  cooperate  with  his  old  classmates  of 
the  school  of  engineers.  On  leaving  the  school  oi3Ietz^  the 
officer  of  artillery  and  the  officer  of  engineering  will  each 
follow  his  own  special  career.  The  first  will  be  able,  in 
some  cases,  to  perform  functions  analogous  to  those  of  the 
civil  engineer — to  lay  out  roads  and  construct  bridges  ;  but, 
for  all  that,  he  will  never  become  engineer-in-chief.  The 
Poly  technician,  entering  the  navy,  may  rise  to  the  highest 
grades,  he  may  become  admiral;  he  will  never  become 
marshal  of  France. 

That  which  is  true  of  the  Polytechnician  in  civil  and 
political  life,  is  true  also  of  vegetables  and  animals  in  the 
matter  of  development,  on  the  hypothesis  of  Darwin.  It 
is  this  which  makes  Darwin's  theory  so  popular,  for  it  ex- 
plains problems  constantly  put  by  naturalists,  such  as  the 
relations  of  types,  the  characterization  of  groups,  the  anal- 
ogies between  them,  the  transitional  types  that  link  them 
together,  etc. 

But,  while  recognizing  the  convenience  of  this  theory  of 
the  English  philosopher,  in  the  interpretation  of  a  great 
number  of  facts,  I  am  obliged  to  reject  it  because  it  is  ir- 
reconcilable with  other  facts ;  but  chiefly  because  it  is  in 
disaccord  with  the  physiological  laws  of  which  I  spoke  in 
my  first  lecture  upon  the  history  of  man. 

However,  since  the  attempt  has  been  made  to  derive 
from  the  Darwinian  hyjDothesis  the  conclusion  that  man 
descended  from  the  monkey,  let  us  see  how  this  pretended 
filiation  agrees  with  the  theory  of  which  they  claim  it  is  a 
consequence. 


ON   THE   ORIGIN   OF   MAN.  77 

Before  a  theory  which  makes  man  descend  from  the 
monkey  can  be  logically  deduced  from  the  ideas  of  Darwin, 
it  must  be  admitted  that  the  human  type  may  be  derived 
from  the  monkey  type ;  that  the  first  is,  in  fact,  but  the  de- 
velopment of  the  second. 

Now,  in  spite  of  superficial  resemblances,  which  early 
led  to  the  remark  that  the  monkey  is  a  caricature  of  man, 
there  are,  in  the  general  plan  of  the  two  organizations,  sci- 
entifically considered,  profound  differences.  Man  walks 
about  on  his  feet,  preserving  the  full  liberty  of  his  arms  and 
hands ;  the  monkey  is  made  for  climbing,  and  employs  his 
four  members  for  this  purpose.  In  man,  all  the  apparatus 
of  locomotion,  the  feet,  the  legs,  the  thighs,  the  vertebral 
column,  all  the  muscles  that  are  attached  to  it,  are  modified 
to  make  an  animal  with  two  feet — a  walker.  In  the  mon- 
key, on  the  contrary,  all  these  parts  are  arranged  and  com- 
bined in  a  way  to  make  an  animal  climber  ;  the  anterior 
members  themselves,  with  all  their  dependencies,  are  ap- 
propriated to  this  purpose. 

Now,  the  walker  and  the  climber  are  two  different  types ; 
to  derive  the  one  from  the  other  is  in  formal  opposition 
with  the  doctrine  of  Darwin. 

This  fundamental  difference  between  the  human  type 
and  the  monkey  type  has  been  long  known  to  science  as 
true  of  the  little  monkeys,  that  could  be  easily  procured. 
There  has  been  a  great  desire  to  determine  if  it  would  hold 
equally  in  the  monkeys  that  approach  us  more  nearly,  called 
the  anthropomorphic  monkeys.  Extremely  profound  stud- 
ies on  this  question  have  been  made  for  many  years  and  in 
many  countries.  The  facilities  now  existing  for  procuring 
animals  from  far  distant  regions  have  enabled  Mr.  Richard 
Owen,  the  most  distinguished  anatomist  of  England,  to 
make  a  serious  study  of  this  subject.  M.  Davernoy,  the 
friend  and  colaborer  with  our  great  Cuvier,  has  made  the 
complete  anatomy  of  a  gorilla.   Later,  an  anatomist  of  whom 


78  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

we  regret  the  premature  loss,  M.  Gratiolet,  and  Dr.  Alex, 
have  made  a  not  less  detailed  anatomy  of  the  chimpanzee. 
These  two  anatomists  have  given  particular  attention  to 
this  question.  These  men,  having  studied  the  monkeys 
that  most  nearly  approach  the  human  type,  have  shown  that 
the  adaptation  of  all  the  parts  is  not  for  walking,  but  for 
climbing,  so  that  even  among  anthropoid  apes  the  charac- 
teristic fundamental  monkey  type  is  most  strikingly  appar- 
ent. 

So,  although  perfected  in  certain  respects,  the  monkey 
does  not  change  its  nature.  This  fact  agrees  with  the  ideas 
of  Darwin.  Pushed  to  their  utmost  limit,  faithfulness  to 
these  ideas  leads  us  to  say  :  Even  when  the  monkey  has  by 
evolution  become  a  being  equal  to  man,  this  being  wall  not 
be  man.  It  wall  be  a  monkey  as  intelligent  as  we  are,  but 
it  will  not  be  a  walker,  it  will  be  a  climber. 

It  may  be  said,  gentlemen,  as  I  am  not  a  Darwinist, 
that  I  falsify  the  doctrine,  and  draw  inexact  conclusions. 
But  I  have  had  the  pleasure,  this  very  year,  of  seeing  one 
of  the  most  reliable  Darwinists,  M.  Charles  Vogt,  and  he 
expresses  himself  on  this  question  exactly  as  I  have  done. 
He  also  admits  that,  according  to  Darwin,  man  and  the  mon- 
key could  not  arise  from  a  common  stock,  but  that  the  two 
tj^pes  commenced  to  diverge,  and  were  sharply  separated 
before  the  appearance  of  the  most  inferior  monkey ;  before 
the  formation  of  those  striated  monkeys  of  which  I  here 
show  you  a  specimen.  This  opinion,  put  forth  by  my  emi- 
nent contem.porary,  in  a  special  work,  and  repeated  in  full 
anthropological  congress,  has  double  authority.  As  M. 
Vogt  is  a  zoologist,  an  earnest  anatomist,  he  would  know, 
although  a  Darwinist,  that  man  could  not  have  descended 
from  the  monkey. 

Permit  me  to  enlarge  still  further  upon  this  question,  and 
to  show  you  that  every  thing  leads  to  the  same  conclusion. 

I  have  just  glanced  rapidly  at  the  subject  of  adult  man 


ON   THE   ORIGIN   OF   MAN.  79 

and   of  adult  monkeys.      Take  them  now  when  they  are 
in  progress  of  development,   and  see  what  occurs  in  the 

Fig.  10. 


Japanese. 

Yellow  Race,  Sinaic  Branch.— Comi) rising  the  Chinese,  the  Japanese,  and  the 

Indo-Chinese  Families. 

brain  during  the  period  of  life  passed  by  either  of  them  in 
the  bosom  of  its  mother.     I  scarcely  need  to  remark  upon 


80  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

the  importance  of  this  study.  The  brain  is  incontestably, 
and,  above  all,  from  the  point  of  view  of  development,  the 
most  interesting  organ,  whether  of  man  or  of  the  monkey. 
It  is  the  seat  of  intelligence  and  of  instinct.  On  this  ac- 
count all  the  world  attributes  the  highest  value  to  the  char- 
acters furnished  by  it.  Well,  how  does  brain  development 
proceed  in  the  monkey  and  in  man?  Here,  in  a  few  words, 
I  can  show  you  an  important  fact. 

The  brain,  contained  in  its  bony  case,  is  separated  into 
diverse  regions.  Let  us  consider  only  two,  the  anterior  or 
frontal  lobe,  and  the  median  or  temporal  lobe.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  in  the  case  of  animals,  united  by  links  of  filiation, 
the  succession  of  development  in  these  two  lobes  ought  to 
be  the  same.  Well,  between  men  and  monkeys  there  is, 
in  this  respect,  a  complete  difference.  In  man,  it  is  the  an- 
terior lobe  which  begins  to  develop  first,  and  is  most 
promptly  formed,  the  lateral  or  temporal  lobe  coming  last. 
In  the  monkey,  on  the  contrary,  it  is  the  temporal  lobe 
which  is  developed  first,  and  the  anterior  lobe  which  is  de- 
veloped afterward,  so  that,  in  the  successive  formation  of 
the  parts  of  this  most  important  organ,  there  is  a  complete 
opposition. 

It  is  evident  that  two  beings  that  develop  inversely,  so 
to  say,  cannot  be  derived  the  one  from  the  other. 

This  fact  has  great  significance,  not  only  by  itself,  but 
also  in  its  consequences.  It  gives  an  answer  to  one  of  those 
vague  assertions,  too  often  employed  by  those  who  wish  to 
establish  the  monkey  as  our  ancestor.  There  exist  human 
beings  with  very  smaU  skulls,'  and  consequently  with  the 
brain  equally  reduced.  Moreover,  at  the  same  time  that 
the  brain  is  diminished  in  volume,  it  is  also  simplified,  and 
then  it  jDresents  a  certain  resemblance  to  the  brain  of  the 
anthropomorphic  monkey  when  considered  in  the  lump  and 
without  entering  into  details. 

There  has  been  no  want  of  arguments  from  this  resem- 


ON  THE   ORIGIN   OF   MAN.  81 

blance.  Some  have  wished  to  see  in  these  facts  a  ease  of 
atavis77i,  that  is  to  say,  a  case  of  the  reproduction  of  the 
characters  of  a  very  remote  ancestor.  It  has  been  said  that 
these  individuals  with  rudimentary  brains,  which  have  been 
called  microcephals,  realize  accidentally  the  form  of  brain 
of  our  first  ancestors  when  they  were  detached  from  the 
family  of  monkeys. 

Well,  the  researches  of  M.  Gratiolet,  on  the  mode  and 
the  succession  of  development  of  man  and  the  monkeys, 
have  shown  that  this  pretended  resemblance  does  not  exist 
at  all.*  On  the  contrary,  precisely  by  reason  of  the  different 
manner  in  which  the  development  proceeds  when  the  human 
brain  is  arrested  in  its  course,  it  is  separated  still  further 
from  the  brain  of  the  monkey.  In  this  case  the  brain  of 
man  may  sometimes  be  smaller  and  more  simple  than  that  of 
the  monkey,  but  it  does  not  resemble  it  for  all  that.  In  a 
word,  although  man  may  seem  to  fall  below  the  beast  by 
the  imperfection  of  his  organ  of  thought,  he  does  not  be- 
come an  animal  anatomically. 

I  understand,  gentlemen,  that  this  part  of  our  subject  is 
likely  to  give  you  some  difficulty.  Perhaps  you  have  not 
always  followed  me  step  by  step.  However,  you  compre- 
hend, I  think,  how  deep  and  conclusive  are  the  arguments 
opposed  to  the  theory  that  we  are  descended  from  the  mon- 
keys. 

The  conviction  becomes  still  more  complete,  if  that  is 
possible,  when  we  examine  with  some  care,  and  seriously 
compare  with  positive  scientific  data,  the  reasons  on  which 
it  has  been  attempted  to  found  this  doctrine.  We  are 
then  struck  with  the  vagueness  and  partial  verification  of 
the  facts  or  assertions  almost  always  alleged  by  its  parti- 
sans. Pretty  much  always  they  are  reduced  to  simple 
possibilities.  They  say.  Would  it  not  be  possible  for  the 
hand  of  man,  by  the  transformation  of  such  and  such  mus- 
*  See  Appendix  G. 


82  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

cles,  to  come  from  that  of  the  monkey  ?  Is  it  not  possible 
for  a  monkey,  by  dint  of  standing,  to  end  by  changing  his 
posterior  hands  into  true  feet  ?  Is  it  not  possible  that  the 
same  course  should  enable  him  to  acquire  calves,  which  are 
wanting  in  the  monkey,  and  should  have  lengthened  the 
bones,  which  are  much  shorter  in  the  monkey,  etc.  ? 

Gentlemen,  when  we  get  upon  the  ground  of  possibility 
I  know  not  where  we  shall  stop.  Every  thing  is  possible 
except  that  which  implies  contradiction.  Consequently  we 
are  no  longer  on  the  ground  of  science,  which  demands  pos- 
itive, precise  facts.    We  are  living  in  the  land  of  romance. 

I  will  add  that  in  many  cases  these  possibilities  are  op- 
posed to  the  facts  that  transpire  in  our  day,  so  that  the 
reasoning  comes  to  this :  "  But  is  it  not  possible  that 
events  took  place  in  former  times  differently  from  those 
which  happen  to-day  ?  "  Serious  science,  gentlemen,  can- 
not accept  this  mode  of  reasoning.  It  does  not  admit 
changes  in  the  laws  which  rule  this  world — in  those  which 
touch  organic  beings,  any  more  than  in  those  which  concern 
inorganic  bodies. 

There  is  but  one  argument  which  has  been  worked 
out  in  detail  in  such  a  manner  that  it  can  be  taken  and  dis- 
cussed point  by  point.  It  is  the  one  drawn  from  a  certain 
number  of  skulls  discovered  at  greater  or  less  depths  in  the 
soil,  and  which  present  somewhat  exceptional  characters. 
These  skulls  tave  been  described  with  cafe  and  offered  as 
presenting  features  intermediate  beween  the  human  crani- 
um and  that  of  the  monkeys. 

I  can  show  you  a  model  of  the  skull  that  has  been  most 
relied  upon,  and  has  acquired  a  real  notoriety,  under  the 
name  of  the  Neanderthal  skull  (Fig.  20).  It  was  discovered 
in  1857  in  the  environs  of  Dusseldorf.  This  skull  is  chiefly 
distinguished  from  the  human  cranium  by  the  very  great 
prominence  of  the  eyebrows.  It  is  further  characterized  by 
its  less  height,  by  its  length,  and  by  some  other  particulars 


84  THE   NATUEAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

of  which  the  description  would  take  too  much  time.  From  its 
general  form,  and  from  the  existence  of  two  eyebrow  swell- 
ings, it  has  been  said  that  it  is  related  to  anthropomorphic 
monkeys  and  particularly  to  orangs.  Gentlemen,  you  need 
only  compare  this  Neanderthal  skull  wdth  the  crania  of 
the  orang  and  gorilla.  Even  at  the  distance  where  you 
are  sitting,  you  can  see  that  between  the  human  head  and 
the  animal  head  there  is  an  enormous  difference,  resulting 
from  the  volume  of  the  cranium  and  consequently  of  the 
brain.  The  brain  of  the  man  to  whom  this  cranium  be- 
longed would  never  remind  us  of  that  of  the  animal  whose 
head  I  am  now  holding. 

There  are  yet  other  points  on  which  I  believe  I  ought 
to  dwell.  To  this  Neanderthal  skull  has  been  given  an 
exaggerated  antiquit3\  It  is  said  to  be  the  most  ancient 
skull  that  was  ever  found.  This  statement  is,  at  least,  very 
adventurous.  It  has  been  said  that  it  resembles  no  other 
cranium.     This  is  an  error  easily  exposed. 

As  to  the  antiquity  of  this  famous  head,  it  was  found 
in  a  cavern  situated  on  the  bank  of  a  small  river  where  the 
soil  presents  no  characters  which  enable  us  to  fix  its  pre- 
cise geological  age.  So  that  to  assign  to  this  cranium  an 
antiquity  superior  to  that  of  the  men  of  whom  I  spoke  in 
a  preceding  lecture,  an  existence  anterior  to  the  men  in 
France  who,  with  stone  weapons,  combated  the  rhinoceros 
and  the  mammoth,  is  a  supposition  purely  gratuitous.  And, 
mark  you,  Mr.  Lyell,  the  famous  English  geologist,  who 
has  written  a  volume  to  demonstrate  the  antiquity  of  man, 
was  the  first  to  express  his  serious  doubts  as  to  the  age  of 
this  cranium.  I  repeat,  the  geological  conditions  in  which 
it  was  found  do  not  enable  us  to  fix  its  precise  date ;  but 
nothing  in  the  whole  case  authorizes  us  to  consider  the 
cavern  in  which  it  was  found  as  more  ancient  than  the 
geological  formation  which  contained  the  bones  of  Auri- 
gTiac  or  Moulin-Quignon. 


ON  THE   ORIGIN   OF   MAN.  85 

Be  this  as  it  may,  the  statement  that  this  cranium  re- 
sembles no  other  is  an  error  (Fig.  21).  From  the  first,  when 
the  designs  and  moulds  of  the  Neanderthal  skull  spread 
over  England,  English  anthropologists,  strong  partisans  of 
the  antiquity  of  man,  did  not  hesitate  to  say  that  they  had 
found  in  their  country  skulls  that  much  resembled  this  one. 
Later,  it  was  clearly  demonstrated  that  its  general  form 
was  no  other  than  that  of  the  Celtic  skull.  It  is  unwise  to 
lay  stress  upon  the  frontal  protuberance,  on  the  flattening 
and  elongation  of  the  skull.  Here  is  a  smaller  head  which 
presents  the  same  characters.  You  can  even  see  that  the 
frontal  prominences,  uniting  at  the  centre,  resemble  still 
more  that  of  the  orang-outang  than  those  of  the  Neander- 
thal skull.  Now,  this  skull  is  that  of  an  idiot  who  died 
some  years  since  in  a  hospital  of  Paris. 

Finally,  gentlemen,  we  have  proofs  of  another  nature. 
The  owner  of  tlie  Neanderthal  skull,  M.  Docteur  Fullrott, 
made  moulds  of  the  interior  of  this  cranium,  and  it  is  easy 
to  see  that  the  brain  of  which  we  have  here  the  imperfect 
reproduction  is  that  of  a  man  belonging  without  doubt  to 
a  savage  race,  but  who  has  not  less  the  essential  human 
characters. 

Once  more :  M.  Bruner-Bey,  w^hose  works  on  these  ques- 
tions are  of  great  importance,  has  made  a  cast  of  the  in- 
terior of  a  cranium  found  in  a  tumulus  of  Poitou,  and  he 
shows  that  this  mould,  taken  from  an  individual  of  indis- 
putable Celtic  origin,  adapts  itself  perfectly  to  the  interior 
of  the  Neanderthal  skull.  So  that  it  is  not  only  in  the  ex- 
terior form  of  the  head  that  the  man  of  Neanderthal  re- 
sembles the  Celt,  but  also  in  the  brain. 

The  demonstration  appears  to  me  complete,  and  we  have 
no  hesitation  in  recognizing  in  the  so-called  pithecoide 
(relative  of  the  monkey)  a  truly  human  cranium,  and,  what 
is  more,  a  Celtic  cranium.  The  enlarged  arch  of  the  eye- 
brows is  no  objection  to  this  conclusion ;  for  this  fact  is 


86 


THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 


reproduced  in  our  day,  as  I  have  just  shown,  and  as  was 

also  shown  by  examples  at  the  congress  of  anthropologists. 

To  sum  up :  the  theory  that  man  is  descended  from  the 

monkey,  by  means  of  successive  modifications,  is  in  reality 


Fig.  21. 


An  Australian  Skull  from  Western  Port,  in  the  Museum  of  the  Roj'al  College  of 
Surgeons,  with  the  Contour  of  the  Neanderthal  Skull.  Both  reduced  to  one- 
thii%  the  Natural  Size. 


only  a  brilliant  fancy  which  has  no  support  in  precise  facts ; 
in  most  cases  it  depends  upon  possibilities  and  often  upon 
possibilities  in  flagrant  opposition  to  facts. 

This  theory,  I  hesitate  not  to  say,  is  without  support 
from  any  source  ;  but  especially,  and  mark  me  well,  it  is  in 
absolute  contradiction  to  the  theory  of  Darwin. 

I  have  dwelt  upon  the  question  because  it  has  made 
around  us  a  great  noise.  The  idea  of  giving  us  the  monkey 
as  our  ancestor  is  impressive,  because  it  is  new  to  certain 
persons,  though  already  ancient ;  it  is  impressive  by  the 
species  of  liberty  of  thought  that  it  seems  to  imply.     Hence 


ON  THE   ORIGIN   OF   MAN.  87 

it  has  become  as  it  were  popular,  and  probably  you  have 
already  heard  it  spoken  of  many  times.  Another  cause  of 
the  notoriety  it  has  acquired  is,  that  it  has  been  sustained 
in  the  name  of  philosophy  and  combated  in  the  name  of 
theology,  reappearing  consequently  in  the  grand  current  of 
controversy  that  often  carries  men  of  good  judgment  away 
from  the  ground  where  they  ought  to  stand. 

As  for  us,  gentleman,  we  do  not  pretend  to  be  either 
theologians  or  philosophers.  We  are  exclusively  men  of 
science ;  we  have,  then,  to  disturb  us,  only  the  truths  of 
science.  It  is  in  the  name  of  these  truths  that  I  have  had 
to  recognize  the  weakness  of  science,  to  say.  Whence  comes 
man  ?  but,  in  the  name  of  scientific  truth,  I  can  affirm  that 
we  have  had  for  ancestor  neither  a  gorilla  nor  an  orang- 
outang nor  a  chimpanzee ;  any  more  than  a  seal  or  a  fish^ 
or  any  other  animal  whatever.* 

*  Sec  Appendix  H. 


LECTURE   IV. 

PHYSICAL    CIIARACTEES    OF    THE    HUMAN    EACES. 

Gentlemen  :  I  have  already  given  you  three  lectures 
on  the  history  of  man.  They  have  all  been  devoted  to  the 
examination  of  general  questions,  the  solution  of  which  can 
alone  throw  light  on  the  study  of  the  human  races,  and 
guide  us  in  the  midst  of  the  thousands  of  facts  of  detail 
it  involves. 

These  three  lectures  constitute  the  first  part  of  the 
collection  of  facts  and  ideas  that  I  have  undertaken  to 
expound  to  you.  In  them,  you  know,  I  considered  man  in 
his  relation  to  the  universe  and  to  the  earth  he  inhabits. 
We  found  tliat  there  exists  only  one  species  of  man  ;  tJiat 
this  species,  much  more  ancient  than  was  formerly  believed, 
was  the  contemporary  of  the  elephant  and  rhinoceros  on 
the  soil  of  France.  Although  spread  everywhere  at  pres- 
ent, the  human  species,  like  other  organic  and  living 
beings,  had  its  special  centre  of  creation.  It  must  have 
appeared  at  first  on  a  particular  and  circumscribed  joart  of 
the  globe,  situated  probably  in  the  centre  of  Asia.  Our 
earth,  then,  was  peopled  by  migration.  In  the  varied  jour- 
neyings  performed  to  reach  all  points  of  his  domain,  man 
has  encountered  thousands  of  conditions  of  existence.  He 
has  accommodated  himself  to  them  all — in  other  words,  he 
has  become  acclimated  everywhere. 

There  is  another  question  we  had  to  meet,  because  it 


PHYSICAL   CHARACTERS   OF  THE   HUMAN   RACES.       89 

was  seriously  put  to  us,  but,  to  answer  which,  we  had  to 
confess  the  insufficiency  of  present  knowledge :  it  is  the 
question  of  the  first  origin  of  man.  Our  answer  to  this 
question  was  founded  on  science  alone.  I  have  made  this 
declaration  many  times ;  I  repeat  it  every  time  I  speak 
before  a  new  audience.  For  the  most  part,  the  problems 
we  have  considered  are  treated  by  theologians  and  philoso- 
phers. I  am  simply  a  man  of  science,  and  it  is  in  the  name 
of  comparative  physiology,  of  botanical  and  zoological 
geography,  of  geology  and  paleontology,  in  the  name  of  the 
laws  which  govern  man  as  well  as  animals  and  plants,  that 
I  have  always  spoken. 

To-day,  however,  I  shall  not  need  to  recur,  as  much  as  in 
preceding  lectures,  to  these  terms  of  comparison.  We  have 
to  commence  the  study  of  man  considered  in  himself;  and, 
in  the  first  place,  to  account  in  a  general  way  for  the 
modifications  presented  by  the  human  type. 

These  modifications  constitute  the  characters  which  serve 
to  distinguish  divers  groups  of  men — the  different  human 
races.  Before  studying  these  races  in  detail,  we  must  fix 
somewhat  the  extent  and  the  meaning  of  these  characters. 

To  give  order  even  to  the  brief  study  of  the  characters 
of  the  human  race,  it  is  necessary  to  separate  them  into  a 
certain  number  of  groups.  This  division  is  easily  made, 
because  of  the  multiple  nature  of  man,  which  at  the  same 
time  connects  him  with  the  rest  of  creation,  and  gives  him 
a  position  apart. 

Like  all  organic  and  living  beings,  man  has  a  body. 
This  body  will  furnish  a  first  class  of  characters — the 
physical  characters.  Like  animals,  man  is  endowed  with 
instinct  and  intelligence.  Though  infinitely  more  developed 
in  him,  these  characters  are  not  changed  in  their  funda- 
mental nature.  They  appear  in  the  various  human  groups 
in  phenomena,  sometimes  very  different,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  languages.     The  differences  of  manifestation   of  this 


90  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

intelligence  will  constitute  the  second  class  of  cliaracters — 
the  intellectual  characters. 

Finally,  it  is  established  that  man  has  two  grand  facul- 
ties, of  which  we  find  not  even  a  trace  among  animals. 
He  alone  has  the  moral  sentiment  of  good  and  of  evil ;  he 
alone  believes  in  a  future  existence  succeeding  this  actual 
life ;  he  alone  believes  in  beings  superior  to  himself,  that 
he  has  never  seen,  and  that  are  capable  of  influencing  his 
life  for  good  or  evil. 

In  other  words,  man  alone  is  endowed  with  morality  and 
religion.  These  two  faculties  are  revealed  by  his  acts,  by 
his  institutions,  by  facts  that  differ  from  one  group  to  ano- 
ther, from  one  race  to  another.  From  these  is  drawn  a  third 
class  of  characters — the  onoral  and  religious  characters. 

Let  us  attend  to-day  to  the  physical  characters,  to  those 
furnished  by  the  body. 

In  man,  as  in  animals,  the  body  is  made  up  of  organs. 
We  can  not  only  study  the  exterior  of  the  body,  but  we 
can  also  penetrate  the  interior  and  discover  its  anatomy. 
Indeed,  this  is  the  only  means  of  finding  out  its  most  im- 
portant organs.  In  this  study  we  can  stop  with  the  form, 
the  arrangement,  or  we  can  go  further,  and  seek  to  under- 
stand the  actions  of  the  parts,  the  functions  they  perform. 
We  thus  pass  from  anatomy  to  physiology.  But  these 
functions  may  be  disturbed  by  many  maladies  that  cannot 
be  neglected,  and  which  are  the  province  oixjatliology. 

In  our  present  study,  we  must  not  neglect  any  of  these 
orders  of  facts.  You  see  how^  we  are  led  to  draw,  from  the 
body  alone,  four  categories  of  characters,  namely :  I.  Ex- 
terior characters ;  II.  Anatomic  characters ;  III.  Physiologi- 
cal characters ;  IV.  Pathological  characters. 

PHYSICAL   CHARACTERS. 
I.  Exterior  Characters. — When  we  see  men  or  ani- 
mals, the  first  thing  that  strikes  us  is  their  size.     Our  do- 


PHYSICAL   CHARACTERS   OF   THE   HUMAN   RACES.       91 

mestic  species  are  made  of  great  and  small  races,  and  it  is 
the  same  with  man. 

The  extreme  dimensions  of  the  human  form,  whether 
great  or  small,  have  been  very  much  exaggerated.  Every- 
where there  has  been  a  belief  in  the  existence  of  races  of 


Fig.  22 


Patagonian. 
Ecd  Eace.  Southern  Branch,  Pampoan  Family. 

dwarfs  and  races  of  giants.  For  instance,  the  Greeks  be- 
Keved  in  the  existence  of  a  people,  called  by  them  pigmies, 
whose  country  they  phiced  sometimes  in  one  direction, 
sometimes  in  another,  but  always  beyond  the  limits  of  the 
world  they  truly  knew^     These  w^ere  little  men  about  four- 


92  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

teen  inches  in  height,  who,  it  was  believed,  were  obhged  to 
pluck  down  the  com  with  strokes  of  the  axe,  and  who 
passed  a  part  of  their  time  defending  themselves  against 
the  cranes.  In  the  last  century  this  fable  of  the  pigmies 
was,  so  to  speak,  renewed  and  applied  to  the  kymos,  w4io 
were  said  to  inhabit  Madagascar.  It  is  needless  to  add 
that,  sinc§  we  have  seen  them  more  closely,  pigmies  and 
kymos  have  disappeared. 

The  fables  relative  to  giants  are  the  contrary  of  the 
preceding.  Among  these  fables  there  are  some  modern 
ones,  for  a  time  believed  to  be  founded  on  real  observation. 
The  first  voyagers  who  doubled  Cape  Horn  found  there  the 
Patagonians,  whose  dimensions  they  singularly  exagger- 
ated. Pigafetta,  the  companion  of  Magellan  in  the  first 
voyage  around  the  world  (1520),  pretended  that  he  and  his 
companions  scarcely  reached  to  the  height  of  their  waists. 
One  of  his  successors,  Jofre  Loaysa,  with  still  greater  ex- 
travagance, declared  that  the  heads  of  the  Christians  reached 
only  to  the  upper  part  of  their  thighs.  This  was,  you  see, 
to  attribute  to  these  people  a  height  of  thirteen  to  sixteen 
feet. 

Time  and  science  have  done  justice  to  these  fables  and 
exaggerations.  Let  us  see  what  are  in  reality  the  extremes 
presented  by  the  human  stature. 

It  is  plain  that  in  this  research  we  must  leave  out  ex- 
ceptional individuals,  of  w^hich  we  see  a  certain  number  in 
the  fairs  and  museums,  or  anywhere,  for  money.  It  is  a 
question  neither  of  General  Tom  Thumb,  whom  you  have 
perhaps  met  sometimes  in  the  Champs  Elysees,  nor  of  the 
French  or  Chinese  giants,  recently  exhibited  in  Paris.  I 
will  only  remark,  in  passing,  that  these  individual  excep- 
tions appear  among  all  nations,  although  more  rarely,  per- 
haps, in  the  midst  of  savage  populations. 

The  smallest  known  race  is  that  of  the  Bushman,  which 
inbabits  the  southern  part  of  Africa ;  the  greatest  is  the 


PHYSICAL   CHARACTERS   OF   THE   HUMAN   RACES.       93 

Patagoniaii,  of  wliicli  we  just  named  the  country.  An 
Eno-lisli  traveller,  Barrow,  measured  all  the  inhabitants 
of  a  tribe  of  the  first ;  a  French  traveller,  Alcide  d'Orbigny, 
took  the  exact  measure  of  a  great  number  of  individuals 
belonging  to  the  second  of  these  two  extreme  races. 

It  results  from  these  measurements  that  the  mean  height 
of  the  Bushman  is  four  feet  three  and  one  half  inches,  and 
that  of  the  Patagonian  five  feet  eight  inches.  The  mean 
dijBPerence  between  the  greatest  and  the  smallest  human 
race  is  then  sixteen  and  one-half  inches. 

The  smallest  Bushman  measured  by  Barrow  was  a  wom- 
an who  was  only  three  feet  ten  and  one-half  inches.  The 
largest  Patagonian  measured  by  D'Orbigny  attained  six 
feet  three  inches.  The  greatest  difference  existing,  then, 
between  normal  human  individuals  is  two  feet  eight  and 
one-half  inches.  The  ratio  between  the  extremes  of  height 
just  named  is  nearly  as  1  to  0.6.  These  figures  signify 
much  and  lead  to  important  consequences. 

First,  the  difference  in  size  among  our  domestic  animals 
is  much  greater  than  that  above  indicated.  From  the 
great  dogs  that  promenade  in  our  court-yards,  down  to  cer- 
tain dogs  which  have  figured  at  dog-shows,  the  ratio  is  1  to 
0.3.  The  difference  is  also  as  great  between  the  large 
brewers'  horses  of  London  and  horses  from  Shetland,  which 
are  sometimes  not  larger  than  a  Newfoundland  dog.  These 
horses  and  these  dogs  are,  however,  only  different  races  of 
a  single  species.  One  cannot  reason,  then,  from  differ- 
ences of  height  to  sustain  the  multiplicity  of  human 
species. 

There  is  another  consideration  not  less  important : 

From  all  the  data  I  can  gather,  it  results  that  the  mean 
stature  of  men,  the  world  over,  is  about  five  feet  three 
inches.  But  this  mean,  like  that  given  above,  results 
from  very  numerous  and  very  diverse  heights.  If  in 
thought  we  place   all  men  in   one  line  according  to  their 


94  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

height,  it  is  easy  to  see  that  we  should  obtain  a  series  in 
which  the  difference  from  one  to  the  next  will  not  be,  per- 
haps, the  -^xTo*^  ^f  ^^  inch. 

But  this  is  not  all.  In  this  graduated  series,  the  men 
of  the  same  race  will  be  far  from  being  placed  together. 
There  will  be  in  this  respect  the  strangest  mixture.  All 
the  Patagonians  are  not  nearly  six  feet  three  inches  in 
height,  nor  all  the  Bushmen  as  short  as  three  feet  ten  and 
a  half  inches.  Among  our  cuirassiers  and  the  hundred 
guards  of  the  emperor  many  individuals  would  be  found 
with  the  first ;  the  Lapps  of  the  north  of  Europe  and  the 
Mincopees  of  the  isles  of  Andaman  in  the  Gulf  of  Bengal 
would  mix  with  the  second. 

Now,  in  no  other  kind  of  animal,  with  numerous  species 
and  of  limited  growth,  is  there  any  thing  parallel.  Tlie 
domestic  races  alone  present  something  like  its  analogue. 
So  that,  by  themselves,  these  considerations  drawn  from 
the  height  furnish  excellent  proof  of  the  unity  of  the  hu- 
man species. 

The  study  of  proportions  would  show  us  like  facts  and 
conduct  to  similar  conclusions.  But  I  leave  considerations 
of  this  kind,  to  pass  to  other  characters  almost  as  striking 
as  those  of  height.  I  v,^ish  to  speak  of  those  drawn  from 
the  complexion,  and  first  of  all  from  the  color  of  the  skin. 
The  general  coloration  of  the  body  is  a  well-defined  charac- 
ter ;  but  we  need  not  exaggerate  its  value. 

If  you  observe  several  portraits  representing  individuals 
of  the  white  race,  you  may  see  that  their  tint  is  sometimes 
as  dark  as  that  of  the  Guinea  negro.  In  the  portrait  of 
Rammohun-Roy,  the  celebrated  Brahman  reformer,  the  fine- 
ness and  regularity  of  his  profile  attest  that  he  is  of  the 
purest  Aryan  blood,  and  his  color  is  that  of  a  negro  just  a 
little  blanched.  Again,  there  are  Abyssinians  whose  fea- 
tures recall  the  fine  Semitic  type,  and  yet  few  negroes  sur- 
pass them  in  blackness.     So  all  black  men  are  not  negroes. 


Fig.  23. 


A  Fellah  Woman  and  Children  (Egyptian). 
White  Race,  Aramean  Branch,  Libyan  Family, 
5 


96  THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

Reciprocally,  Livingstone  has  found  in  the  centre  of  Africa 
negroes  of  the  color  of  cafe  au  lait. 

The  color  of  the  human  race  varies  from  white,  such  as 
is  seen  in  Dutch  and  Danish  women,  to  violet  or  yellow,  to 
yellow-citron  or  smoke,  to  copper-red  or  brick.  By  ap- 
pealing to  your  recollections,  you  can  establish  a  series 
passing  from  light  to  dark  by  insensible  shades  such  as 
could  scarcely  be  reproduced  upon  the  palette  of  a  painter. 

Recollect  that  some  of  these  extremes  of  color  are  fre- 
quent among  domestic  animals,  and  are  sometimes  much 
greater.  With  black  hens,  it  is  not  the  skin  alone  that  is 
colored.  All  the  great  interior  membranes,  the  sheaths 
of  the  muscles,  the  aponeuroses,  as  well  as  the  flesh  of  the 
wings,  present  an  aspect  very  little  appetizing.  So  it  is 
sought  to  weed  them  out  of  the  poultry-yard ;  and  still  in 
certain  parts  of  the  globe  they  are  constantly  produced  and 
would  evidently  soon  become  a  race  if  left  to  multiply. 
Here,  again,  in  the  case  of  animals,  the  difference  from 
race  to  race  is  much  greater  than  in  the  case  of  man. 

Sometimes,  in  the  presence  of  variations  of  color  like 
these  we  have  described,  we  ask  if,  between  the  negro  and 
the  white,  there  do  not  exist  anatomical  differences  in  the 
skin  ?  The  minute  study  of  this  organ  answers  us  in  the 
negative. 

The  skin  is  composed  of  three  layers,  which  together 
constitute  a  true  organ  having  its  proper  functions.  So  it 
is  often  called  the  cutaneous  organ.  On  the  exterior  is 
the  epidermis^  that  dry  and  insensible  layer  which  covers 
the  entire  body,  and  protects  it  against  the  action  of  outer 
agents. 

Interiorly,  and  immediately  above  the  fatty  layer,  is  the 
true  skin — it  is  the  essential  and  living  part  of  the  cutane- 
ous organ  ;  it  is  this  which  receives  the  blood-vessels  and 
nerves. 

Between  the  true  skin  and  the  epidermis  is  a  dark  lay- 


PHYSICAL   CHARACTERS   OF  THE   HUMAN   RACES.       97 

er,  composed  of  distinct  cells.  It  is  the  mucous  membrane 
of  Malpiglii,  so  named  from  the  anatomist  who  first  de- 
scribed it.  The  cells  that  form  it  are  a  simple  secretion  of 
the  true  skin.  It  is  this  layer  which  is  the  seat  of  color. 
It  exists  in  all  men,  but  the  cells  that  it  contains  are  more 
or  less  colored  according  to  race.  In  whites  themselves,  in 
certain  parts  of  the  bod}",  around  the  nipples,  in  the  specks 
of  freckles,  in  the  beauty-spots,  etc.,  we  sometimes  see  them 
as  deep  as  in  the  negro. 

You  see  that  the  color  in  different  human  races  is,  when 
developed,  only  a  phenomenon  of  local  coloration,  of  ex- 
actly the  same  nature  as  that  encountered  in  races  of  do- 
mestic animals.  If  time  permitted  me  to  enter  more  fully 
into  the  subject,  I  could  make  this  fact  much  more  evident, 
but  the  hour  advances  and  I  must  hasten. 

To  the  skin  are  attached  a  certain  number  of  organs 
w^hich  may  be  considered  as  adjuncts.  These  are  chiefly 
the  villosities  or  hairs,  the  sebaceous  glands,  and  the  sweat- 
glands.  Between  these  annexed  organs,  there  exists  a 
certain  balance  which  physiology  easily  explains.  So  in 
glabrous  races,  that  is,  races  with  little  or  no  villosities  on 
the  body,  the  sebaceous  apparatus  is  much  more  developed. 
This  fact  is  very  marked  in  the  African  negro,  whose  skin 
sometimes  bears  slight  prominences,  sketching  a  sort  of 
arabesque  by  the  extraordinary  development  of  these  little 
organs. 

It  is  to  the  development  of  the  sebaceous  apparatus 
that  the  odor  of  the  negro  is  due.  This  odor  is  so  strong, 
so  persistent,  that  it  suffices  to  the  identification  of  a  negro- 
ship  a  long  time  after  it  has  left  the  trade.  But  it  is  not 
negroes  alone  that  are  characterized  by  malodorous  exha- 
lations. It  is  the  same  with  the  whites  themselves.  You 
all  know  that  a  dog  follows  his  master  by  the  scent. 
Savage  people,  whose  senses  are  more  exercised  than 
ours,  distinguish  very  quickly  the  general  odor  which  char- 


98  THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

acterizes  a  race ;  and,  in  Peru,  they  give  special  names  to 
that  of  the  white  and  of  the  black  as  well  as  to  their  own. 

Fig.  24. 


Oblong  and  Prognathous  Sknll  of  a  Negro  ;  Side  and  Front  Views,  one-third 
of  the  Natural  Size. 


PHYSICAL   CHARACTERS   OF   THE   HUMAN    RACES.       99 

As  to  the  hair  which  may  be  seen  on  different  parts 
of  the  body,  a  special  mention  is  due  to  that  of  the  head. 
All  people  have  more  or  less  hair  on  the  head,  and  this 
gives  also  very  good  characters.  Among  these  the  most 
essential  are  drawn  from  the  form  presented  by  the  trans- 
verse cut  when  examined  under  the  microscope.  In  the 
yellow  peoj^le,  the  Americans  and  the  white  allophyles,  this 
cut  is  more  or  less  circular.  In  the  Aryans,  of  which  we 
are  a  part,  it  is  oval ;  in  the  negroes  it  takes  the  form  of  an 
elongated  ellipse.  It  is  evident  that  a  circular  cut  indicates 
a  cylindrical  hair.  Such  hair  is  very  coarse  and  stiff,  and 
never  curling  or  frizzled ;  an  oval  cut  indicates  a  slight 
and  regular  flattening.  In  this  form  the  hairs  are  finer, 
and  may  be  made  into  curls  or  waves  more  or  less  marked. 
Finally,  the  elliptical  cut  can  only  appear  when  the  hair  is 
much  flattened,  almost  like  a  thick  ribbon.  These  are  the 
finest,  and  these  alone  have  the  aspect  of  wool  which 
characterizes  the  head  of  the  negro. 

Crosses  between  these  different  races  sometimes  produce 
very  remarkable  heads  of  hair.  The  negro  crossed  with 
the  Brazilian  produces  the  Cafuso,  whose  hair,  forming  an 
immense  wig,  is  at  the  same  time  long,  stiff,  and  kinked. 

I  would  further  enlarge  upon  these  exterior  characters, 
as  being  the  ones  of  which  we  can  most  easily  give  account, 
but  time  fails  me,  and  I  pass  to  the  second  class  of  physical 
characters,  to  those  which  we  must  seek  in  the  interior. 

II.  Anatomic  Characters. — The  anatomic  characters 
may  be  drawn  from  the  solid  parts  of  the  body,  that  is,  the 
skeleton,  from  the  soft  parts,  and  even  from  the  liquids. 
I  shall  at  first  confine  myself  particularly  to  those  displaj^ed 
by  the  head. 

In  the  head  itself  we  must  distinguish  the  cranium  from 
the  face.  The  first  incloses  the  brain,  whence  proceed  the 
organs  of  sense,  with  the  exception  of  those  of  touch,  prop- 


100  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

erly  speaking.  Above  all,  it  is  the  seat  of  intelligence ; 
on  these  various  accounts  it  merits  a  separate  examination. 

The  general  form  of  the  cranium,  that  is,  the  relation  be- 
tween the  longitudinal  and  transverse  diameters,  furnishes 
an  excellent  character.  When  this  relation  is  less  than 
that  of  100  to  78,  the  cranium  is  considered  as  elongated 
from  front  to  back :  it  is  dolichoceplialic.  When  the  rela- 
tion varies  from  100  to  78  or  80,  the  cranium  is  medium  or 
average ;  we  say  it  is  mesocephalic.  Finally,  when  the 
relation  is  from  100  to  80,  and  above,  the  cranium  is  con- 
sidered short,  and  is  said  to  be  hr  achy  cephalic. 

These  forms  sometimes  characterize  very  large  human 
groups.  So  almost  all  the  negroes  are  dolichocephalic; 
nearly  all  the  j^ellow  people,  and  most  of  the  Americans, 
are  brachycephalic  or  mesocephalic.  Among  the  whites, 
and  even  sometimes  in  tw^o  populations  belonging  to  the 
same  branch  of  the  white  race,  we  find  the  two  extremes. 
The  Germans  of  the  north  are  dolichocephalic,  the  Germans 
of  the  south  brachycephalic. 

While  recognizing  the  importance  of  the  characters 
drawn  from  these  general  forms,  we  must  guard  ourselves 
against  exaggerating  their  import  or  giving  them  a  wrong 
signification.  Some  authors,  belonging  to  the  dolichocephalic 
races,  have  pretended  that  the  elongation  of  the  head  behind 
is  a  sign  of  intellectual  superioritj-.  The  fact  I  have  just 
stated  suffices  to  refute  this  conclusion,  and  nothing  justifies 
it.  The  Germans  of  the  south  are  noways  inferior  to  their 
countr^mien  of  the  north.  In  the  Academy  of  Sciences 
in  Paris,  the  brachycephalic  crania,  or  at  most  the  mesoce- 
phalic, are  in  very  great  majority ;  and  still,  what  associa- 
tion of  men  is  superior,  in  an  intellectual  point  of  view,  to 
this  philosophical  bod}'  ? 

Analogous  indications  have  been  drawn  from  the 
greater  or  less  capacity  of  the  cranium.  It  has  been  sup- 
posed that  this  exactly  corresponded  in  measure   to  the 


PHYSICAL   CHARACTERS  OF  THE   HUMAN   RACES.     101 

volume  of  the  brain,  and  this  volume  has  been  regarded  as 
a  sort  of  measure  of  intellectual  power. 

That  there  is  some  truth  at  the  bottom  of  the  idea  that 
a  brain  sufficiently  developed  is  necessary  to  give  the  power 
to  fulfill  its  functions,  is  what  all  the  world  admits.  But 
that  intellectual  power  is  measured  by  the  quantity  of 
cerebral  matter  entering  into  the  composition  of  the  organ 
is  in  contradiction  to  the  observations  and  the  figures  of 
many  anatomists,  among  others,  of  R.  Wagner. 

In  considerations  of  this  nature  we  do  not  generally  take 
account  of  the  stature.  Now,  although  the  head  does  not 
enlarge  in  the  same  proportion  as  the  rest  of  the  body,  it  is 
not  the  less  true  that  the  body  influences  its  dimensions. 

Besides,  with  organized  and  living  beings,  the  volume, 
the  mass  of  organs,  is  not  ail.  Their  special  energy  is 
much  more.  Certainly  you  all  know  small  persons,  of 
slender  aspect,  who  are  more  active  and  strong  than  some 
of  their  comrades  who  are  larger  and  more  muscular. 
Well,  how  is  it  that  what  is  true  of  flesh,  of  muscle,  is  not 
also  true  of  brain  ? 

After  the  cranium  we  come  to  the  face.  But  I  will 
only  speak  of  a  single  order  of  characters  drawn  from  the 
jaws  and  teeth. 

Observe  a  negro,  and  a  European.  Look  at  the  jaws 
and  teeth  of  the  first.  You  see  them  project  in  front.  In 
the  second,  on  the  contrary,  teeth  and  jaws  are  equally 
vertical.  The  first  of  these  is  called  prognathism  (Fig.  24), 
and  the  peoples  or  individuals  who  present  them  are  said 
to  be  prognathous;  the  second  (Fig.  25)  takes  the  name 
of  orthognathism  and  characterizes  the  orthognathous  races 
or  individuals. 

Prognathism  has  long  been  considered  as  characterizing 
the  negro  races.  Since,  we  have  found  it  in  people  who 
could  not  be  affiliated  with  the  negro;  and,  fi  nail}',  looking 
closely  into  the  matter,  we  have  found  it  in  the  heart  of 


Fig.  25. 


Side  and  Front  Alews  of  the  Eound  and  Orthognathou?  Skull  of  a  Calmuck, 
after  Vou  Baer.    Oue-third  the  Natural  Size. 


PHYSICAL   CHARACTERS   OF   THE  HUMAN  RACES.     103 

white  populations.  At  Paris,  even,  it  is  frequent  enough, 
particularly  among  women.  This  is  a  fact  of  which  you 
can  convince  yourself,  as  I  have  often  done  during  my 
rides  in  the  omnibus. 

Judging  by  the  crania  that  we  possess,  prognathism  is 
characteristic  of  a  population  incontestably  European  which 
lives  at  the  south  of  the  Baltic,  the  Esthonians.  This  peo- 
ple is,  furthermore,  the  remains  of  the  most  ancient  race  of 
Western  Europe.  It  is  this  race,  without  doubt,  which, 
mixing  its  blood  with  new-comers,  has  left  in  the  midst  of 
our  great  cities  those  indications  of  a  prognathous  race  to 
which  I  have  just  referred. 

After  studying  the  cranium  and  face  separately,  we  must 
examine  the  head  in  its  ensemble.  From  this,  also,  we  draw 
important  characters.  I  will  only  mention  one,  which  has 
a  certain  real  value,  but  the  signification  of  which  some 
liave  exaggerated  and  falsified. 

Camper,  an  anatomist  of  Holland,  studied  comparatively 
the  Greek  and  Roman  medallions  and  statues,  and,  struck 
with  the  air  of  majesty  presented  by  the  Greeks,  gave  for 
a  reason  that  the  facial  angle  was  greater  than  in  the  Ro- 
mans (Fig.  26).  This  angle  is  formed  by  two  lines  which 
meet  at  the  extremity  of  the  front  teeth,  and  of  w^hich  one 
passes  by  the  middle  of  the  orifice  of  the  ear,  while  the 
second  is  tangent  to  the  forehead. 

Pushing  these  researches  much  further.  Camper  believed 
that  he  discovered  a  regular  decrease  of  the  facial  angle  in 
the  human  race.  Going  further,  and  applying  it  to  animals, 
he  placed  in  a  descending  scale,  man,  monkeys,  carnivora, 
birds,  all  characterized  by  smaller  and  smaller  angles. 
Whence,  to  conclude  that  the  facial  angle  measures,  so  to 
say,  the  intelligence,  is  but  a  step,  which  was  taken  with- 
out hesitation. 

As  this  conclusion  gives  great  interest  to  the  measure- 
ment of  the  facial  angle,  many  processes  and  many  instru- 


104  THE  NATURAL   HISTORY  OF  MAN. 

ments  have  been  j^roposed  to  obtain  it  with  all  possible  ex- 
actitude. The  go7iiometer,  invented  by  my  assistant  M. 
Docteur  Jacquart,  attained  this  end  better  than  any  other. 

Jacquart  did  not  stop  with  making  this  instrument.  He 
used  it ;  and,  in  a  beautiful  work,  he  shows  among  other 
things  that  the  right  angle  exists  in  the  white  race,  contrary 
to  what  Camper  believed;  that  we  do  observe  it,  in  intelli- 
gent persons,  who  are,  however,  not  sensibily  superior  to 
others  with  a  lesser  angle.  The  facial  angle  cannot,  then, 
be  considered  as  measuring  the  intelligence,  the  reach  of 
the  mind. 

M.  Jacquart  shows,  besides,  that,  in  the  population  of 
Paris,  the  angular  differences  of  which  we  are  speaking  are 
much  more  considerable  than  those  that  CamjDer  regarded 
as  characterizing  races.  He  shows  that  here,  again,  there 
is  from  race  to  race  that  entanglement  of  traits  which  I  have 
so  many  times  pointed  out.  Yet  here,  as  elsewhere,  the 
average  furnishes  good  characters  to  determine  human 
groups. 

Again,  the  skeleton  presents  important  characters. 
We  ought,  at  least,  to  examine  the  breast,  the  pelvis,  the 
bones  of  the  limbs,  etc. ;  but  we  must  leave  this  subject,  to 
say  a  word  on  the  soft  parts. 

Regarded  in  the  two  extremes  of  humanity,  the  white 
European  and  the  negro,  the  nervous  system  presents  a  fact 
which  it  is  important  to  point  out.  With  the  first,  the 
nervous  centres — the  brain  and  spinal  cord — are  relatively 
more  voluminous.  In  the  second,  on  the  contrary,  it  is  the 
expansions  from  the  centres — the  nerves — which  are  more 
voluminous. 

The  circulatory  apparatus  presents  a  balance  some- 
what analogous.  With  the  white,  the  arterial  apparatus, 
which  carries  the  blood  to  the  organs,  is  relatively  more 
developed  than  the  venous  apparatus  that  draws  the  blood 
toward  the  heart. 


Fig.  26. 


Greeks  op  Athens. 
Wiute  Race,  European  Branch,  Greek  Family. 


106  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY  OF  MAN. 

The  blood  of  the  negro,  studied  in  his  native  country,  is 
more  viscous  and  darker  colored  than  that  of  the  white. 
That  of  the  Creole  negro  of  New  Orleans  is,  on  the  contrary, 
paler  and  more  aqueous,  and  recalls  the  blood  of  the  anaem- 
ic. So,  a  simple  change  of  habitat  sometimes  modifies  a 
human  race  in  this  most  profound  character — in  this  liquid 
pabulum  destined  to  penetrate  and  nourish  all  parts  of  the 
body. 

III.  Physiological  Characters. — I  shall  dwell  briefly 
on  the  physiological  characters,  and  only  point  out  two 
general  facts,  of  which  you  will  easily  see  the  importance. 

As  regards  all  the  great  periods  of  life  and  all  the  great 
functions,  there  is  a  nearly  complete  identity  among  all  men, 
to  whatever  race  they  belong. 

When  this  resemblance  is  not  apparent,  the  cause  is  not 
in  the  nature  of  the  races,  but  in  the  influence  of  conditions 
of  existence.  This  is  well  proved  by  the  fact  that  races  the 
most  widely  separated  resemble  each  other  completely 
when  they  are  exposed  to  identical  conditions  through  a 
change  of  habitat.  So,  the  precocity  of  the  negro  has  been 
cited  as  distinguishing  this  race  from  European  nations  ; 
but,  when  white  people  live  for  generations  in  hot  countries, 
they  take  on  the  same  peculiarity.  The  negress  and  the 
English  Creole  of  the  isles  of  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  are  just 
alike  in  precocity. 

On  the  contrary,  the  study  of  secondary  functions  shows 
that  they  vary  from  one  group  to  another,  and  sometimes 
very  widely.  But,  then,  also,  we  see  that  the  environment, 
the  manners,  the  habits,  etc.,  are  the  cause  of  these  vari- 
ations ;  and,  again,  we  see  races  the  most  unlike  come  to 
resemble  each  other  so  much  as  to  be  confounded.  There 
are  hunters  of  English  and  French  descent  who  have  their 
senses  of  sight  and  hearing  as  quick  and  sharp  as  the  red- 
skins. 


PHYSICAL   CHARACTERS   OF  THE   HUMAN   RACES.     107 

111  conclusion,  the  study  of  physiological  characters 
strongly  attests  the  fundamental  unity  of  the  human  race, 
b}'-  throwing  light  on  the  marvelous  flexibility  of  our  organ- 
ism. 

Fig.  27. 


Indian  of  the  Mexican  Coast  (Aztecs). 
Red  Race,  Northern  Branch,  Southern  Family. 


IV.  Pathological  Characters. — The  study  of  dis- 
eases presents  entirely  similar  facts,  and  conducts  to  the 
same  conclusions. 

All  the  human  races  are  accessible  to  the  same  diseases. 
If  any  circumstances — isolation,  for  instance — have  pre- 
served some  one  of  them  from  affections  common  to  the 
others,  a  simple  coming  together  suffices  for  the  propaga- 
tion of  the  disease.  The  eruptive  maladies  seem  to  have 
been  implanted  in  America  by  the  Europeans ;  but,  once 
implanted  among  the  indigenous  races,  they  have  raged 


108  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

with  a  violence  unknown  to  us — a  violence  whicli  is  ac- 
counted for  by  the  kind  of  life  led  by  these  people. 

Yet  immunities,  at  least  relative,  have  been  proved. 
For  instance,  the  negro  race  is  much  less  sensible  to  the 
emanations  of  marshes,  to  the  miasms  from  stagnant  wa- 
ters, than  the  white  race.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  much 
more  easily  affected  by  phthisis. 

Other  more  complete  immunities  have  been  observed, 
and  some  have  even  wished,  in  consequence,  to  justify  the 
admission  of  a  distinct  human  species.  But  these  immuni- 
ties, even  the  best  marked,  disappear  with  time,  especially 
under  the  influence  of  conditions  of  existence.  I  will  give 
you  a  curious  example  : 

Ele^Dhantiasis  is  a  hideous  malady,  peculiar  to  certain 
warm  countries,  which  swells  and  deforms,  sometimes  in 
the  strangest  way,  the  parts  of  the  body  it  attacks.  In 
one  of  the  Antilles,  in  Barbadoes,  this  disease  was  seen 
from  the  first  among  the  negroes,  but  had  constantly  spared 
the  whites  till  1704.  That  year  a  white  person  was  seized, 
and  since  then  the  malady  has  extended  in  this  race;  but 
it  never  attacks  any  but  Creoles.  Up  to  the  present  time, 
Europeans,  who  settle  in  this  isle,  enjoy  the  ancient  im- 
munity. You  see  it  is  only  a  question  of  complete  accli- 
mation. 

Gentlemen,  I  believe  I  have  sketched,  in  this  one  lecture, 
a  body  of  facts  and  ideas  which,  at  the  museum,  occupied 
at  least  ten  lectures,  each  as  long  as  this  to-day.  So,  you 
see  how  many  things  I  have  been  compelled  to  omit.  In- 
complete as  is  this  presentation,  it  is  sufficient,  I  think,  to 
establish  clearly  some  general  facts,  and  prepares  the  way 
for  an  important  conclusion. 

You  have  seen  that,  considering  man  from  the  point  of 
view  of  his  height  and  color,  we  may  form  a  graduated 
series  which  passes  from  one  extreme  to  the  other  by 
insensible  gradations.     You  have  seen  further  that,  in  this 


PHYSICAL   CHARACTERS   OF   THE   HUMAN   RACES.     109 

series,  groups  the  most  distinct  by  otiier  cbaracters — the 
most  separated  by  their  habitat — are  found  intermixed. 

Permit  me  to  add  that  we  should  get  the  same  result, 
whatever  the  exterior  or  anatomical  character  upon  which 
we  establish  our  series. 

The  study  of  functions,  whether  performed  in  a  normal 
manner,  in  a  state  of  health,  or  under  the  perturbing  in- 
fluence of  disease,  shows  us  identical  fundamental  facts 
revealing  the  unity  of  human  nature. 

Even  apparent  exceptions  come  under  the  general  facts 
when  we  take  account  of  the  influence  of  the  environment 
which,  as  you  have  seen,  effaces  some  of  the  most  marked 
diflferences. 

In  this  examination  of  the  physical  man,  every  thing- 
leads  to  the  conclusion  which  we  had  already  reached  in 
our  earlier  lectures  ;  and  we  can  repeat  with  redoubled 
certainty :  the  differences  among  human  groups  are  char- 
acters of  race,  and  not  of  species ;  there  exists  only  one 
human  species  ;  and,  consequently,  all  men  are  brothers — 
all  ought  to  be  treated  as  such,  whatever  the  origin,  the 
blood,  the  color,  the  race. 

Gentlemen,  the  lectures  I  have  given  here  require  a 
special  preparation,  and  are  not  always  easy  to  prepare; 
but  I  shall  not  regret  either  my  time  or  my  pains,  if  I  am 
able,  in  the  name  of  science,  and  that  alone,  to  render  a 
little  more  clear  and  precise  for  you  this  great  and  sacred 
notion  of  the  brotherhood  of  man. 


LECTURE   V. 

INTELLECTUAL   AISTD   MORAL    CHAKACTEKS    OF   THE    HUMAN 
KACE. 

Gextlemex  :  I  resume  my  discourse  for  the  fifth  time 
on  the  same  subject.  You  have  already,  on  four  different 
occasions,  studied  man  ;  and,  again,  man  is  the  subject  of 
this  lecture. 

On  the  preceding  occasions  I  ran  over  some  of  the 
general  questions  that  arise  concerning  the  history  of  the 
human  race.  Depending  ahvays  and  exclusively  upon  sci- 
ence, I  have  shown  that  this  species  is  unique ;  that  all 
men  are  of  the  same  species ;  and  that,  in  consequence  of 
this  fact,  they  ought  to  regard  each  other  as  brothers,  what- 
ever the  color  of  the  skin,  whatever  language  they  speak, 
whatever  country  they  inhabit. 

This  species  at  first  occupied  a  very  limited  part  of  the 
earth.  It  spread  all  over  the  globe  at  an  earlier  epoch 
than  w^as  formerly  believed ;  more  recent  researches  have 
demonstrated  that  man  existed  in  France  along  with  the 
hyena,  the  elephant,  the  rhinoceros — that  is  to  sa}^,  along 
with  animals  seen,  in  our  day,  only  in  distant  countries. 

As  man  appeared  at  first  on  a  restricted  point  of  the 
globe,  and  is  found  to-day  everywhere,  it  is  evident  that  he 
has  traveled  in  all  directions  from  his  ce?itre  of  creation^ 
and  peopled  the  earth  by  migration  much  as  do  the  Euro- 
peans at  the  present  time.  These  journeyings  have  exposed 
him  to  all  the  influences  which  can  be  encountered  on  the 


INTELLECTUAL   CHARACTERS.  m 

surface  of  our  planet,  and  he  lias  become  acclimated  every- 
where as  we  see  him  to-day. 

In  the  study  of  general  questions  relative  to  the  history 
of  our  species,  we  had  to  ask  w4iat  was  the  origin  of  man. 

On  this  point  I  have  been  obliged  to  confess  the  insuffi- 
ciency of  actual  knowledge.  But,  if  I  was  not  able  to  say 
whence  man  came,  I  could  say,  in  the  name  of  science, 
whence  he  did  not  come ;  I  could  affirm  that  our  ancestor 
was  not  an  animal — neither  a  monkey,  nor  a  seal,  nor  any 
other  animal  whatever. 

At  our  last  meeting  we  commenced  the  study  of  the 
general  characters  presented  by  the  human  species,  and  we 
examined  ii&  physical  characters  ;  that  is,  those  which  may 
be  drawn  from  the  body  studied  in  a  state  of  health  and  of 
disease.  We  were  led  also  to  pass  in  review  its  exterior 
characters,  its  anatomic  characters,  physiological  and  path- 
ological. We  thus  obtained  an  idea  of  the  general  nature 
of  man,  considered  exclusively  from  "an  organic  point  of 
view.  Well,  this  study  of  man,  in  his  material  relations,  led 
us  to  the  conclusion  that  there  is  but  one  human  species, 
so  that  it  confirmed  the  results  at  which  we  arrived  in  our 
first  lectures. 

But  is  the  body  all  of  man  ?  And,  after  studying  the 
material  being  that  strikes  our  senses,  is  there  nothing  more 
to  study  ?     Science  will  answer. 

When  a  naturalist  studies  ants,  he  is  not  content  with 
describing  the  thorax,  the  abdomen,  the  jaws  and  the  legs. 
He  shows  also  how  they  construct  their  ant-hill,  and  to 
what  use  its  chambers  are  destined  ;  its  galleries,  where 
so  manj^  and  such  divers  things  are  stored  ;  he  shows 
further,  how  they  raise  their  larvae  and  their  young  ones ; 
how  they  hold  in  captivity  the  plant-lice  destined  to  furnish 
an  aliment  which  they  secrete,  as  do  the  cows  and  sheep  we 
keep  in  our  stables. 

When  a  naturalist  gives  the  history  of  bees,  he  does  not 


112  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

limit  himself  to  a  description  of  their  body  and  wings ;  he 
is  careful  to  show  how  they  build  their  hives,  gather  and 
knead  the  wax  to  construct  the  comb  in  which  they  deposit 
honey,  the  first  sweet  known  to  man.  He  calls  the  atten- 
tion of  the  reader  or  listener  to  that  unique  female,  always 
alone  in  each  hive ;  he  shows  the  respect  and  care  that  all 
the  bee-workers  have  for  this  female,  who  is  at  once  their 
queen  and  their  mother. 

In  other  words,  the  naturalist  studies  the  instincts  of 
the  ants  and  the  bees. 

When  he  attempts  the  history  of  man,  shall  he  put  aside 
that  which  in  him  represents  these  instincts  ?  Evidently 
not. 

Consequently  he  must  not  stop  w^ith  the  body.  He 
must  consider  the  intelligence  which  is  in  us,  and  which,  up 
to  a  certain  point,  we  have  in  common  with  animals ;  he 
must  show  that  it  is  this  element  of  our  being  w^iich  recog- 
nizes the  outer  world,  which  judges,  which  aspires.  His 
work  will  be  very  imperfect,  if  he  neglects  this  something 
of  which  the  nature  escapes  us,  but  of  which  the  power  is 
such,  that  through  it  man  has  not  only  vanquished  all  ani- 
mals, whatever  their  defenses,  their  size,  or  their  strength, 
but  he  has  overcome  and  made  to  work,  as  his  servants, 
even  the  immutable  forces  of  the  inanimate  world,  achiev- 
ing all  distances,  thanks  to  the  railroad  !  outstripping  time, 
thanks  to  the  telegraph  !  and  even  annihilating  pain,  thanks 
to  chloroform ! 

Then,  along  with  the  material  characters  Avhich  we  stud- 
ied at  our  last  lecture,  we  now  take  up  intellectual  char- 
acters. 

It  is  our  distinct  intention,  in  taking  up  characters  of  a 
nature  so  new,  still  to  remain  exclusively  on  the  ground  of 
science. 

We  know  the  existence  of  faculties,  and  we  shall  point 
out  their  most  general  manifestations ;  but  we  shall  have 


INTELLECTUAL   CHARACTERS.  II3 

no  concern  with  the  nature  of  these  faculties.     In  a  word. 


we  are  not  philosophers.  Here,  as  in  preceding  lectures, 
we  shall  remain  a  man  of  science — a  naturalist,  and  noth- 
ing else. 

It  will  be  impossible  for  me  to  examine  these  characters 
in  detail.  I  shall  neglect  several,  and  limit  myself  to  say- 
ing something  on  language,  on  writing,  on  the  fundamen- 
tal forms  of  society,  on  industry,  and  on  dress. 

I.  Language, — It  will  not  be  denied  that  the  most  es- 
sential of  all  the  manifestations  of  intelligence  is  language. 

"Animals  have  voice,  man  alone  has  speech."  This 
phrase  is  from  an  ancient  philosophic  naturalist — from  the 
great  Aristotle,  who  lived  some  four  centuries  before  our 
era ;  it  is  as  true  to-day  as  it  was  more  than  two  thousand 
years  ago.     In  fact,  man  alone  possesses  articulate  speech. 

But,  you  all  know  that  the  manifestations  of  speech 
vary  from  people  to  people.  Each  of  these  manifestations 
— the  languages,  as  we  call  them — constitutes  one  of  the 
most  essential  characters  of  the  different  human  groups. 
You  all  know  a  German,  a  Spaniard,  an  Englishman,  by 
his  language.  But  this  is  not  the  limit  of  the  scientific  im- 
portance of  this  character.  Unhappily,  I  cannot  here  enter 
into  details.  I  shall  only  attempt  to  show  you,  in  a  few 
words,  how  the  study  of  language  throws  light  on  the 
history  of  human  groups,  even  in  the  case  of  those  who 
have  lost  all  historic  data. 

You  know  that  in  France  other  languages  than  French 
are  spoken,  and  that,  on  all  sides  of  us,  we  find  the  Gascon 
in  the  south,  the  bas-Breton  in  Brittany,  the  Alsatian  in 
Alsace,  etc.  Whence  comes  this  diversity  of  language 
among  a  people  at  present  so  remarkably  homogeneous  ? 

History  answers  this  question.  It  teaches  us  that,  until 
a  certain  epoch,  Languedoc,  Alsace,  Brittany,  formed  so 
many  separate  states,  having  each  its  own  language.  From 
this  fact  we  are  enabled  to  draw  important  consequences. 


114  THE  NATURAL  HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

When  we  encounter  a  group  actually  designated  by  a 
single  name,  and  when  we  find  in  this  group  secondary 
groups  speaking  diverse  languages,  we  may  ahnost  to  a 
certainty  conclude  that  formerly  all  these  secondary  groups 
had  their  individual  life,  their  political  independence. 

The  study  of  language  conducts  us  still  further. 

When,  in  place  of  mere  juxtaposition,  each  remaining 
in  the  place  it  has  occupied  for  an  indefinite  time,  the  dif- 
ferent nations,  from  any  cause  whatever,  come  to  be  mixed 
together,  they  each  bring  their  language ;  and,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  fusion,  each  brings  his  part  of  the  language, 
that  becomes  common.  A  language  so  formed  is  a  mixed 
language,  which  consists  of  words  and  turns  of  phrases  re- 
calling the  mother-languages  which  gave  it  birth. 

Here,  again,  history  shows  us  that  this  thing  has  actu- 
ally been  done.  The  English  language,  for  example,  has 
words  and  expressions  which  bring  to  mind  the  languages 
of  all  the  races  that  have  been  mixed  and  confounded  in 
that  island. 

Consequently,  when  we  enter  for  the  first  time  a  country 
of  which  we  know  not  the  history,  and  find  a  population 
presenting  in  its  language  words  and  phrases  borrowed 
from  other  languages,  on  the  right  and  on  the  left,  we  are 
authorized  to  conclude  that  this  population  results  from  the 
mixture  of  anthropological  elements,  which  imjoly  the  lin- 
guistic elements  themselves. 

We  may  go  still  further. 

Language,  you  know,  changes — is  transformed  with 
time.  The  French  language  of  our  day  is  not  the  French 
of  five  centuries  ago ;  the  Frenchman  of  to-day  must  study 
specially  and  with  dictionaries  before  he  can  read  the  French 
of  the  past. 

So,  language  changes,  even  when  there  has  been  no 
displacement  of  population.  And  all  the  more  when  im- 
migration intervenes;  if  mixtures  occur,  the  language  will 


INTELLECTUAL    CHARACTERS.  115 

be  altered,  and  a  new  language  will  arise.  This  new  lan- 
guage may  differ  so  much  from  the  primitive  one  as  to 
appear  at  first  to  have  no  resemblance  to  it.  This  may 
happen  not  only  for  one  people  and  for  one  language, 
but  for  many.  A  language  may  also  become  the  mother 
of  many  different  languages.  But  these  daughter  lan- 
guages always  j^reserve  something  in  common  with  that 
from  which  they  descended ;  and  men  who  have  made  these 
questions  the  object  of  continued  study,  the  linguists, 
know  very  well  how  to  discover  the  filiation.  They  know 
how  to  rise  from  derivative  languages  to  their  primitive 
tongues.  In  this  w^ay  they  attach  together  people  that 
were  thought  to  be  very  distinct  because  they  spoke  lan- 
guages that  at  first  seemed  very  different. 

It  is  by  this  study,  wholly  recent,  but  which  for  some 
years  has  advanced  with  the  stride  of  a  giant,  that  we  are 
able  to  unite  in  one  source  most  of  the  people  who  now 
cover  almost  the  whole  of  Europe  ;  such  as,  on  the  one 
hand,  the  French,  the  Germans,  the  Swedes,  and  the  Span- 
iards ;  and,  on  the  other,  the  people  who  inhabit  Persia 
and  the  valley  of  the  Ganges.  These  people  constitute 
what  is  called  the  Aryan  race. 

More  marvelous  still,  thanks  to  the  comparison  of  lan- 
guages, a  philosopher  of  Geneva,  M.  Adolph  Pictet,  was 
able  to  trace  a  sort  of  history  of  the  primitive  Aryans,  the 
common  parents  of  Europeans,  Persians,  and  Indians.  He 
retraced  their  manner  of  life,  and,  although  they  left  no 
historical  data,  he  has  shown  almost  in  detail  the  point  of 
civilization  at  which  they  had  arrived. 

I  cannot,  you  know,  enter  into  details  relative  to  this 
science,  at  once  so  recent  and  already  so  immense  that  it 
has  been  called  comparative  linguistic  science.  I  can  only 
indicate  the  great  divisions,  because,  perhaps  I  shall,  by- 
and-by,  have  to  refer  to  them. 

All  the  languages  spoken  on  the  surface  of  the  earth 


116  THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

have  been  divided  into  three  fundamental  groups ;  these 
are  the  monosyllabic  languages^  the  agglutinative  lan- 
guages^ and  the  flexible  languages. 

The  monosyllabic  languages  are  the  most  imperfect. 
Each  of  their  words  consists  of  one  syllable.  As  an  exam- 
ple, I  will  name  the  Chinese,  which  is  a  monosyllabic  lan- 
guage, 2^cir  excellence.  In  this  language  each  Avord  presents 
itself  with  a  sense  perfectly  absolute,  and  the  delicacies  of 
our  language,  even  the  distinctions  of  time,  of  place,  of 
going,  of  coming,  etc.,  can  be  translated  only  by  a  kind  of 
paraphrase. 

The  agglutinative  tongues  form  the  second  stage  of  lan- 
guage ;  here  there  are  words,  placed  after  the  fundamental 
conception,  which  serve  to  modify  the  primitive  sense — 
roots,  to  emplo}^  the  expression  in  use.  As  examples  of 
agglutinative  languages,  I  will  name  the  negro  languages, 
and  those  spoken  by  yellow  people,  and  also  by  very  small 
numbers  of  white  people. 

Finally,  the  highest  development  of  language  is  that  of 
flexible  language,  so  named  because,  by  simple  changes  in 
the  termination  of  a  word,  we  can  change  and  modify  the 
absolute  sense,  and  make  it  express  divers  shades  of  mean- 
ing, thus  :  je  parle  {I  sj^eaJc)  now  ;  je  parlerai  {T  shall 
speak)  to-morrow.  Almost  all  the  white  races  speak  flexi- 
ble languages. 

II.  Writing. — Speech  is  evidently  the  first  element  in 
the  formation  of  societies  ;  writing  is  the  most  essential 
element  of  the  progress  of  these  societies.  It  is  speech 
fixed.  This  alone  permits  the  transmission  of  the  results 
of  our  efforts  to  the  most  distant  descendants — of  the  accu- 
mulation of  the  treasures  that  each  generation  has  sepa- 
rately acquired.  I  should  like  to  dwell  upon  its  history ; 
but  I  should  be  drawn  too  far,  and  so,  for  writing  as  for 
language,  I  can  only  indicate  a  few  facts. 

Almost  with  the  lov/est  savages  we  find  means  to  aid 


INTELLECTUAL   CHARACTERS. 


117 


the  memory,  and  serve  as  souvenirs  of  events  to  which  more 
or  less  importance  is  attached.  These  are  called  rtmemonic 
signs.     They  are  sometimes  stones,  sometimes  pieces  of 


Fig.  29 


Fig.  28. 


jj-  n-.c.  .^J. 


6     5    4     3-1 


^^^WMf 


Indian  Bark-lettek. 


Indian  Bark-letter. 


Explanation  of  Fig.  28.— On  one  occasion  a  party  of  explorers,  with  two  In- 
dian guides,  saw  one  morning,  just  as  they  were  about  to  start,  a  pole  stuck 
in  the  direction  they  were  going,  and  holding  at  the  top  a  piece  of  hark, 
covered  with  drawings,  which  were  intended  for  the  information  of  any 
other  Indians  who  might  pass  that  way.  This  is  represented  in  Fi?.  28.  No. 
1  represents  the  subaltern  officer  in 'command  of  "the  party.  He  is  drawn 
with  a  sword,  to  denote  his  rank.  No.  2  denotes  the  secretary.  He  is  repre- 
sented as  holding  a  book,  the  Indians  having  understood  him  to  be  an  at- 
torney. No.  3  represents  the  geologist,  appropriately  indicated  by  a  ham- 
mer. Nos.  4  and  5  are  attaches  ;  No.  6  the  interpreter.  The  eroup  of  figures 
marked  9  represents  seven  infantry  soldiers,  each  of  whom,  as  shown  in 
group  No.  10.  was  armed  with  a  musket.  No.  15  denotes  that  they  had  a 
separate  fire,  and  constiiuted  a  separate  mess.  Nos.  7  and  8  represent  the 
two  Chippewa  guides.  These  are  the  only  human  figures  drawn  without 
the  distinguishing  symbol  of  a  hat.  This  was  the  characteristic  seized  on 
by  them,  and  generally  employed  by  the  Indians,  to  distincruish  the  7'ed  from 
the  ivhite  race.  Nos.  11  and  12  represent  a  prairie  hen  and  a  green  tortoise, 
which  constituted  the  sum  of  the  preceding  day's  chase,  and  were  eaten 
at  the  encampment.  The  inclination  of  tiie  pole  was  designed  to  show  the 
course  puresued;  and  there  were  three  hacks  in  it  below^  the  scroll  of  bark, 
to  indicate  the  estimated  length  of  this  part  of  the  journey,  computing  from 
water  to  water. 

Explanation  of  Fig.  29.  —  This  figure  gives  the  biography  of  Wiugemund,  a 
noted  chief  of  the  Delawares.  No.  1  shows  that  "he  belonged  to  the  oldest 
branch  of  the  tribe,  which  had  the  tortoise  on  their  symbol.  No.  2  is  his 
totem,  or  symbol;  No.  3  is  the  sun,  and  ttie  ten  strokes  represent  ten  war- 
parties  in  which  he  was  engaged.  Those  figures  on  the  left  represent  the 
captives  which  he  made  in  each  of  his  excursions,  the  men  being  distin- 
guished from  the  women,  and  the  captives  being  denoted  by  having  heads, 
while  a  man  without  his  head  is  of  course  a  dead  man.  The  central  figures 
represent  three  forts  v,^hich  he  attacked;  No.  8,  one  on  Lake  Erie;  No.  9, 
that  of  Detroit;  and  No.  10.  Fort  Pitt,  at  the  junction  of  the  Alleghany  and 
the  Monongahela.    The  sloping  strokes  denote  the  number  of  his  followers. 


118  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

wood  sbajDed  in  divers  ways.  A  mode  of  appeal  to  the 
memory,  fomid  in  both  the  Old  and  the  New  World,  con- 
sists in  uniting  packages  of  strings  of  diflferent  colors,  on 
w^hich  are  made  knots  of  divers  forms.  These  are  called 
quijypus.  You  make,  so  to  speak,  a  quippu  every  time  you 
tie  a  knot  in  your  handkerchief  to  enable  you  to  recall 
something. 

Picturing  objects,  men,  events,  in  a  more  or  less  faithful 
manner,  is  not  writing;  it  is  what  is  Q^Xi^^  pictography. 
Such  are  those  gross  representations  employed  even  to-day 
by  the  Indians  of  North  America  to  transmit  information 
(Figs.  28  and  29). 

When  the  object  figured  has  a  conventional  signification, 
we  may  say  that  writing  has  begun.  For  example,  the 
idea  of  prudence  would  be  represented  by  a  serpent,  that 
of  force  by  a  lion.  This  manner  of  translating  thought  is 
symbolic,  ideographic  writing.  It  presents  many  stages. 
The  hieroglyphics  seen  on  Egyptian  and  Mexican  monu- 
ments belong  here.  But  all  these  signs  do  not  constitute 
veritable  writing. 

In  reality,  this  appears  only  when  the  signs  employed 
represent  the  sounds  of  the  language.  After  reaching  this 
point,  writing  again  presents  two  very  different  stages. 
Each  syllable  may  have  its  particular  character  ;  or,  better 
still,  the  elements  of  the  syllable  maybe  represented.  This 
last  form  constitutes  writing,  properly  speaking.  It  is  this 
that  we  employ.  The  collection  of  signs  we  call  an  alpha- 
bet; and  this  alphabet,  which  constitutes  the  first  step  of 
elementary  instruction,  is  certainly  one  of  the  most  marvel- 
ous inventions  of  the  human  mind.  So  almost  all  the  an- 
cients attributed  to  it  a  divine  origin. 

III.  Prhnitive  Forms  of  Society. — As  I  just  said  to  you, 
it  is  by  language  that  societies  begin,  and  by  writing  that 
they  make  the  greatest  progress  in  ciYilization.  But,  be- 
fore they  attain  civilization,  they  have  long  halting-places 


INTELLECTUAL   CHARACTERS.  119 

to  get  over,  and,  regarding  the  human  races  in  their  ensem- 
ble^ we  see  three  very  distinct  kinds  of  primitive  society. 

The  lowest  degree  of  human  association  is  people  that 
hunt  and  fish  ;  and  this  inferiority  is  easily  explained.  A 
society  composed  entirely  of  hunters  cannot  be  numerous, 
because  it  must  live  on  the  game  it  kills.  Therefore,  a 
great  space  is  needed  to  nourish  a  sparse  population.  Be- 
sides, the  hunter's  chances  are  for  the  day  ;  he  is  never  sure 
of  a  living  for  to-morrow.  This  incessant  uncertainty  pre- 
vents him  from  directing  his  intelligence  toward  more  ele- 
vated subjects.  Hunters,  besides,  have  incessantly  to  watch 
their  hunting-grounds  to  prevent  encroachments.  In  other 
words,  the  hunter  is  the  image  of  war.  Wars  easily  arise 
between  neighboring  populations  placed  in  identical  condi- 
tions. These  wars  are  without  mercy,  for  each  prisoner  is 
one  more  mouth  to  feed ;  kill  him,  then.  Hence,  hunting- 
tribes  are  almost  inevitably  courageous,  sometimes  heroic, 
but  warlike  and  cruel. 

As  soon  as  man  domesticates  certain  animals — cattle, 
sheep,  or  llamas — as  soon  as  he  becomes  pastoral,  his  to- 
morrow is  assured.  He  can  at  once  begin  to  occupy  him- 
self with  something  besides  his  food ;  and  we  see  societies 
of  this  kind  begin  to  make  progress.  However,  pastoral 
people  need  vast  spaces  for  their  animals  ;  these  promptly 
exhaust  the  herbage  of  a  canton ;  it  becomes  needful  to  go 
elsewhere  after  food  for  the  animals  which  supply  milk  and 
flesh,  the  nourishment  of  the  master,  and  so  a  pastoral 
population  cannot  exist  in  great  numbers.  They  easily  be- 
come nomadic.  In  their  migrations  the  hordes  meet  and 
dispute  by  force  of  arms  for  the  precious  pasturage.  War 
breaks  them  up ;  but  prisoners  may  be  utilized  by  the  con- 
queror, and  their  food  will  not  be  a  great  sacrifice.  They 
are  spared,  and  slavery  is  born. 

Society  takes  its  third  form,  when  man  finds  that  the 
vegetable  kingdom  furnishes  more  abundant  and  reliable 
6 


120 


THE   NATURAL   HISTORY    OF   MAN. 


food  than  that  obtained  from  animals — when  he  becomes  an 
agriculturist.  Besides,  agriculture  gives  him  leisure.  His 
manners  soften.  War,  when  it  breaks  out,  becomes  less 
cruel.  Prisoners  employed  to  work  in  the  field  can  render 
services  more  and  more  considerable.  Slaver}^  becomes 
serfdom.  Relieved  from  imperious  material  necessities,  the 
intelligence  of  the  master  awakens  and  enlarges.  A  true 
civilization  may  arise  and  grow  among  agriculturists. 

Fig.  30. 


Centuries  ago  Europeans  attained  a  social  state  permit- 
tin  «•  the  degree  of  civilization  of  which  we  are  so  proud, 
and  this  leads  me  to  make  an  observation. 

Too  often,  under  the  influence  of  our  actual  superiority, 
we  disdain  the  people  who  are  behind,  whether  in  the  pas- 


INTELLECTUAL   CHARACTERS.  121 

toral  state  or  in  the  state  of  liiiiiters.     We  proclaim  them 
incapable  of  reaching  our  level. 

This  opinion  is  nowhere  justified.  Forget  not  that  we 
have  passed  by  the  same  halting-places.  Forget  not, 
above  all,  that  many  civilizations  have  preceded  our  own. 
Two  thousand  years  before  our  era  the  Chinese  raised 
monuments  that  still  excite  the  admiration  of  travelers,  cul- 
tivated the  mulberry,  raised  the  silk-worm,  and  possessed 
notions  of  astronomy.  Egyptian  civilization  is  still  more 
ancient.  You  saw  proof  of  this  at  the  Universal  Exposi- 
tion. In  the  temple  raised  under  the  direction  of  N.  Mari- 
ette  you  must  have  admired,  among  other  things,  that 
magnificent  statue  of  Chefren  placed  at  the  bottom  of  the 
hall,  and  which  dates  four  thousand  years  before  our  era. 
At  this  time  we  were  true  savages,  covered  with  the  skins 
of  beasts,  and  carrying  on  our  persons,  under  the  pretext 
of  embellishing  ourselves,  paints  and  tattooing  like  those 
of  the  most  backw^ard  races  of  our  own  day.  The  effect  of 
this  should  be,  on  the  one  band,  to  awaken  our  modesty, 
and  on  the  other  to  render  us  indulgent  to  people  who  are 
yet  at  the  point  which  we  have  escaped. 

IV.  Industries, — It  is  in  the  midst  of  primitive  societies 
that  industries  are  born  and  flourish.  However  low  a  peo- 
ple may  be,  it  always  has  its  own  proper  industries.  Man 
is  essentially  an  industrious  being. 

All  industries  suppose  utensils  ;  and  the  matter  of  which 
these  utensils  are  made  furnishes  the  means  of  determining 
to  a  certain  extent  the  degree  of  civilization  attained  by 
people  whom  we  know  only  by  traces  they  have  left. 

In  the  beginning  w^e  see  stone  alone  used  to  fabricate 
utensils  and  weapons  ;  for  these  two  things  proceed  to- 
gether. Everywhere,  man  is  at  first  content  to  shape 
more  or  less  perfectly  matter  furnished  him  by  the  soil. 
Look  at  these  samples  of  stones  (Fig.  30)  which  have 
served  as  hatchets,  whether  for  domestic  use  or  war.     You 


122 


THE   NATURAL   HISTORY    OF   MAN, 


see  they  are  fashioned  very  simply.  These  objects  came 
from  our  soil ;  they  served  our  first  ancestors,  and  attest 
the  truth  I  have  just  stated. 

In   proportion  as  man's  progresses,  he  is  not  content 
simply  to   shape  the   stone  ;  he  polishes  it.     His  first  at- 


FiG.  31. 


tempts  in  this  way  are  coarse  enough.  At  first  the  edge 
of  the  hatchet  alone  is  polished;  later  the  entire  hatchet, 
and  sometimes  in  a  remarkable  manner  (Fig.  31). 


INTELLECTUAL   CHARACTERS. 


123 


posed 


as   a   prize, 


and    Achilles 


Fig.  32. 


The  hatchets  as  well  as  the  knives  are  generally  of 
silex,  that  is,  of  that  species  of  stone  which  formerly  served 
as  flint  in  striking  fire.  Its  hardness  explains  why  it  was 
cliosen  for  these  purposes.  When  it  began  to  fail  they 
could  employ  others.  Finally,  they  fell  back  on  shells,  and 
it  is  impossible  not  to  admire  some 
of  their  w^orks  executed  with  such 
imperfect  instruments,  with  frag- 
ments of  stone  less  hard  than  our 
silex,  and  the  debris  of  marine 
shells.  After  stone  appeared  the 
metals  ;  but  not  iron,  of  which  we 
know  so  well  the  uses  and  which 
alone  has  made  possible  the  mira- 
cles of  our  modern  industry.  Cop- 
per and  bronze  preceded  iron ;  in 
America  copper,  in  Europe  bronze, 
came  after  stone. 

Finally,  iron  made  its  appear- 
ance, and  many  evidences  prove 
that  from  its  first  discovery  its 
value  was  understood.  In  the 
gymnastic  plays  celebrated  by 
Achilles  on  the  tomb  of  his  friend 
Fatroclus,  at  the  epoch  of  the 
Trojan  War,  twelve  centuries  be- 
fore our  era,  a  mass  of  iron  is  pro- 


himself  speaks  of  its  importance. 
The  diversity  of  material  em- 
ployed in  utensils  marks  the  true  boomekang. 
stages  in  the  history  of  ancient 

peoples.  At  this  time  we  generally  admit  as  distinct  pe- 
riods the  age  of  stone,  the  age  T)f  bronze,  the  age  of  iron. 
The  age  of  stone  is  divided  into  two  periods,  according  as 


124  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

the  utensils  and  weapons  were  polished  or  only  shaped.  It 
is  to  this  most  ancient  period  that  the  population  belonged 
which  lived  in  Europe  with  the  elephant  and  rhinoceros. 

I  must  refer  you  to  the  special  history  of  the  several 
races  for  further  details  of  their  industries.  But  I  will  add 
a  few  facts  to  the  preceding.  Let  us  speak  a  word  about 
the  warlike  industries. 

Wherever  human  society  exists,  we  find  instruments  of 
war.  After  the  need  of  food,  it  seems  the  most  pressing 
want  of  man  is  to  kill  or  enslave  his  kind.  We  may  say 
that  man  is  a  warlike  being. 

Among  the  lowest  people  of  the  globe  we  find  ofi'ensive 
and  defensive  arms;  and  everywhere  those  at  the  bottom 
of  the  scale  astonish  us  by  the  ingenuity  of  these  arms. 
The  Australians,  certainly  a  most  inferior  people,  use  a  not 
very  large  but  very  thick  shield.  Their  skill  in  parrying 
strokes  is  most  remarkable,  as  all  travelers  admit.  The 
same  people  use  curious  weapons  ;  one,  called  the  boome- 
rang (Fig.  32),  is  a  bit  of  hard  wood,  very  flat,  sharp,  and 
more  or  less  curved.  The  inhabitants  know  how  to  throw 
this  little  piece  of  wood  so  that,  after  it  has  struck  the  en- 
emy or  the  game,  it  rises  in  the  air,  turns,  and  falls  into 
the  hand  of  the  thrower.  The  boomerang  realizes,  then, 
the  enchanted  arms  spoken  of  in  the  old  fables — arms 
which,  after  having  struck  the  mark,  come  back  themselves 
to  their  possessor. 

V.  Dress. — If  I  point  out  some  facts  relative  to  dress, 
it  is  to  show  you  how  much  of  connection,  of  real  resem- 
blance, there  is  between  the  most  savage  and  the  most 
civilized  people. 

Everywhere  and  always  man  has  sought  to  embellish 
himself;  sometimes  by  acting  on  himself,  sometimes  by 
borrowing  the  elements  of  his  dress  from  without.  In 
the  tombs  discovered  from  time  to  time  which  inclose 
the  remains   of  men   with   their  stone  hatchets,  used  in 


INTELLECTUAL   CUARACTERS. 


125 


France  against  the  elephant  and  rhinoceros,  in  those  tombs 
I  say,  we  find  collars  (Fig.  33)  made  of  morsels  of  shells 
or  small  corals  which  had  not,  in  the  eyes  of  their  possess- 
ors, a  less  value  than  the  precious  stones  have  for  us.  We 
might  almost  define  man  as  a  being  who  ornaments  him- 
self; and  cei'tainly  here  is  a  great  diff"erence  separating 
him  from   the  animals.     I  shall  not  dwell  on  the  difi'erent 

Fig.  33. 


Necklace. 


materials  taken  from  the  exterior  world  to  cover  our  bodies 
and  embellish  us.  Were  you  to  see  a  woman  of  Tahiti  in 
grand  costume,  you  would  remark  that  when  our  grand- 
mothers had  contrived  the  panniers,  and  the  women  of  our 
day  the  crinoline,  they  only  borrowed  from  the  children 
of  the  South  Sea  a  part  of  their  attire. 

It  is  worthy  of  attention  that,  under  the  pretext  of 
embellishing  himself,  man  has  almost  always  sought  to 
modify  his  own  body.  So  the  Chinese  women,  in  order  to 
make  their  feet  very  small,  cripple  themselves  in  so  grave 
a  manner  that  often  the  little  children  succumb  in  the 
operation.  The  bones  of  the  heel,  in  place  of  elongating 
behind,  are  violently  displaced  and  directed  downward,  so 
that  the  women  walk  on  their  own  heels  as  on  the  heels 


126  THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF  MAN. 

of  their  shoes.  The  toes  are  likewise  turned  under,  the 
big-toe  alone  being  in  place.  Our  women  do  not  go  so 
far;  but  you  know  women  who,  to  make  the  feet  small, 
fear  not  to  give  themselves  corns,  and  jnany  men  do  the 
same. 

At  the  Philippines,  the  group  of  isles  that  you  see  at 
the  east  of  Asia,  is  a  people  whose  women  attach  great 
importance  to  having  the  largest  possible  fist.  To  make  it 
large,  they  swaddle  the  arms,  which  consequently  remain 
slender,  while  the  fist  enlarges  in  a  fashion  very  repulsive 
to  our  European  eyes. 

But  the  head  seems  to  have  been,  by  preference,  the 
object  of  these  strange  caprices,  probably  because  it  is 
the  part  of  the  body  most  evident  and  most  important. 
Some  people  seek  to  change  completely  the  form  of  the 
cranium.  For  this  purpose  they  place  on  the  heads  of  chil- 
dren, immediately  after  birth,  contrivances  which  project 
them  forward  or  backward,  and  then,  by  pressing  tightly 
behind  and  before,  the  head  is  made  flat.  There  is  a  peo- 
ple on  the  western  side  of  America  which  surrounds  the 
head  of  the  infant  with  a  bandage  so  as  to  give  it  the  form 
of  a  sugar-loaf. 

I  must  remind  you  that  among  ourselves  the  ears  are 
still  pierced  to  suspend  ornaments  from  them.  If  men 
have  generally  renounced  this  fashion,  women  remain  very 
faithful  to  it.  But  all  the  other  parts  of  the  visage  have 
been  submitted  to  the  same  mutilations,  the  nose,  the  lips, 
the  cheeks  themselves  have  been  pierced,  always  to  suspend 
or  introduce  into  the  openings  some  morsel  of  wood,  of 
stone,  of  bone,  as  ornament. 

The  face  and  the  forehead  are  frequently  decorated 
with  divers  tattooings  (Figs.  34  and  35),  made  sometimes  by 
pricking,  and  sometimes  by  cutting  the  skin.  At  the  Mar- 
quesas Isles,  not  only  the  countenance,  but  the  entire  body 
s  tattooed.     You  see  here  the  figure  of  a  man  (Fig.  36) 


INTELLECTUAL  CHARACTERS. 


127 


and  jDerliaps  you  think  bim  covered  with   a  motley  cos- 
tume ;  no,  it  is  simply  tattooing. 

Jest  not  too  much  at  these  ornaments  of  savages.  Our 
ancestors  wore  the  same,  and  the  fashion  is  not  wholly 
effaced  with  us.  More  than  one  of  you,  doubtless,  has  on 
the  arm  or  on  the  breast  some  red  or  blue  figure  represent- 
ing a  heart  pierced,  two  swords  crossed,  an  anchor,  or  a 
hammer,  symbols  of  your  profession. 


Fig.  34. 


Fig.  35. 


Head  of  New-Zealandek. 


Head  of  New-Zealander. 


Along  with  these  tattooings  incrusted  in  the  skin  by 
various  processes,  we  may  place  also  the  paintings.  Here, 
again,  is  a  means  of  embellishing  that  every  jDeople  has 
practised  and  practises  still.  Sometimes  these  paintings 
have  precise  significations  ;  there  are  the  paintings  of  war, 
the  paintings  of  peace,  the  paintings  oi  fetes ^  etc.  We  do 
not  go  so  far ;  but  w^e  must  not  forget  that  the  most  civil- 
ized  Europeans  have  painted  and  still  paint  the  counte- 


128 


THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 


nance.  Our  grandmothers  habitually  used  white,  and, 
above  all,  red  ;  they  put  on  patches,  that  is  to  say,  small 
rounds  of  court-plaster,  to  give  beauty  to  the  skin  by  con- 


FiG.  36. 


Caboline-Islandee. 


trast.     And  to-day,  you  know,  our  fashionable  women  tint 
themselves  so  well  that  a  word  has  been  invented  on  this 


INTELLECTUAL   CHARACTERS. 


129 


subject.     So  we    find,  in  our  most   elevated   classes,  that 
which  seems  so  strange  in  savages. 


Fig.  37. 


Fijian  Modes  of  dressing  the  Haik. 


130  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

The  head  of  hair  offers  the  same  considerations.  With 
savages  as  with  us,  it  is  an  object  of  no  less  special  care. 
Negroes,  Hottentots,  Polj^nesians,  etc.,  stiffen  their  hair; 
with  grease,  and  color  it  with  powders,  red,  yellow,  white, 
etc.  (Fig.  37).  Everywhere  they  decorate  it  with  flowers, 
feathers  of  all  sorts,  brilliant  crystals,  grains  of  glass. 
Well,  our  fathers  pomaded  and  powdered  themselves ;  our 
women  pomade  themselves,  and  put  flowers,  feathers,  and 
diamonds,  in  their  hair,  which  are,  after  all,  only  crystals, 
more  or  less  dear.  And  as  to  our  pomades,  whatever  name 
we  give  them,  they  always  have,  for  foundation,  the  oil  of 
almonds,  or  the  fat  of  pork.  You  see  that,  between  the 
article  used  by  savages  and  that  we  make  ourselves,  there 
is  no  great  difference. 

III.  Moral  and  Religious  Characters. — We  pass  to 
another  order  of  characters.  By  his  body,  I  repeat,  man  is 
an  animal,  nothing  more,  nothing  less ;  by  his  intelligence 
he  is  infinitely  superior  to  animals.  But,  to  judge  by  fun- 
damental phenomena,  the  nature  of  our  intelligence  does 
not  differ  from  that  which  they  manifest. 

Are  we,  then,  only  a  more  intelligent  kind  of  animal  ? 
I  have  already  answered  this  question.  No ;  we  are  not 
animals,  we  are  something  else ;  for,  besides  the  phenom- 
ena which  we  have  in  common  with  them,  we  have  our 
special  character,  connected  w^ith  faculties,  of  which  we  find 
not  the  least  trace  in  the  most  elevated  animals.  These 
faculties  are  morality  and  religion. 

I.  Morality. — Among  all  people,  in  all  races,  there  are 
expressions  which  mean  good  and  bad,  honest  man  and 
scoundrel ;  consequent!}',  all  men  have  the  abstract  notion 
of  good  and  evil. 

Objections  have  been  made  to  this  idea  that  morality 
is  an  attribute  of  man ;  or,  rather,  difficulties  have  been 
raised  on  the  subject.  Some  say,  for  example,  that  animals 
also  know  what  is  good  and  what  is  bad.     This  is  true  for 


MORAL  AND   RELIGIOUS  CHARACTERS.  131 

our  most  perfect  domestic  animals,  as  the  dog.  Thanks  to 
our  superior  intelligence,  we  have  accustomed  them  to  that 
which  is  good  and  had  for  us.  But  leave  them  in  a  savage 
state,  and  you  will  never  find  them  doing  any  thing  to 
which  you  can  attach  the  notion  here  implied.  Man  is  cer- 
tainly the  only  being  that  we  see  war  against  pain — physi- 
cal evil — that  he  may  reach  moral  good. 

It  has  been  said  again  that  morals  differ  from  people  to 
people,  and  the  attempt  has  been  made  to  draw  from  this 
an  inference  that  morality  is  not  characteristic  of  man. 
The  faculty  itself  is  here  confounded  with  its  manifestations. 
We  forget  that  the  same  sentiment  can  be  expressed  by 
very  different  and  sometimes  opposite  acts.  I  will  take,  for 
example,  those  which  testify  to  politeness  and  the  respect 
we  pay  to  superiors.  In  the  same  case,  the  European  rises 
and  uncovers  his  head  ;  the  Turk,  on  the  contrary,  remains 
with  the  head  covered,  and  the  Polynesian  sits.  These  con- 
trary acts  are  not  less,  the  one  than  the  other,  acts  of  defer- 
ence. 

We  must  place  ourselves  at  this  point  of  view  to  judge 
of  morahty.  We  must,  in  such  eases,  and,  above  all,  when 
it  is  a  question  of  inferior  peoples,  forget  our  own  notions 
on  this  subject,  and  seek  after  the  general  ideas  of  the  peo- 
ple we  are  studying.  We  must  recur  to  what  has  taken 
place  with  us  at  certain  epochs,  and  then  we  shall  find  that 
there  is  not  as  much  difference  as  we  imagined  between  the 
most  civilized  and  the  most  savage  people.  We  shall  re- 
turn to  the  subject  in  treating  the  history  of  races.  To-day 
I  can  only  say  a  few  words  relative  to  three  chief  principles : 
Respect  for  property,  respect  for  the  life  of  others,  and  re- 
spect for  one^s  self 

I.  Respect  for  Property.~Vi  has  been  said  that  the 
notion  of  property  does  not  exist  among  savage  people. 
This  is  an  error.  With  them,  arms,  utensils,  instruments, 
are  strictly  personal  property,  as  with  us  ;  but  some  travel- 


132  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY    OF   MAN. 

ers  have  been  deceived  by  the  existence,  among  hunting- 
tribes,  of  another  kind  of  property,  communal  property,  if  I 
may  so  speak.  Among  these  people  the  ground  does  not 
belong  to  the  individual,  but  to  the  entire  tribe.  Under 
this  relation  the  property  is  so  well  known  that  war  is  the 
consequence  of  the  least  violation  of  the  hunting-limits. 

Certain  races  have  been  accused  of  being  essentially 
thievish.  This  reproach  is  brought  particularly  upon  the 
negroes  of  the  Gulf  of  Guinea,  and  upon  the  Polynesians. 
They  have  been  accused  of  stealing  even  the  nails  of  the 
ship.  But  let  me  remind  you  what  iron  is  for  people  who 
do  not  have  it.  It  is  more  precious  to  them  than  gold. 
Well,  suppose  there  should  arrive  among  us  a  ship,  gold 
clad  and  nailed  with  diamonds  and  rubies.  Do  you  believe 
it  would  go  out  intact  from  our  ports  ?  Remark  further, 
that,  among  the  negroes  of  Guinea  and  Polynesia,  those 
who  steal  of  their  comrade  are  dishonored  and  punished  as 
they  would  be  with  us.  They  have  the  idea  of  respect  for 
property  the  same  as  ourselves. 

II.  Respect  for  Life.  —  Everywhere  the  life  of  man 
is  sacred ;  everywhere  the  murderer  is  punished ;  but,  with 
ourselves,  circumstances  determine  the  nature  of  the  act. 
Nobody  would  treat  as  an  assassin  him  who  beats  fairly  in 
a  duel ;  the  soldier  who  has  killed  with  his  hand  a  great 
number  of  enemies  is  decorated ;  very  far  from  being 
punished,  he  is  recompensed.  With  savages  the  formula  is 
still  more  elastic.  For  him  the  stranger  is  always  an 
enemy ;  besides,  vengeance  is  in  his  eyes  a  virtue,  and  when 
he  has  a  murder  to  avenge  he  cares  little  to  strike  the 
murderer  himself.  Provided  he  punishes  a  member  of  his 
family  or  his  tribe,  his  vengeance  is  satisfied ;  whence  re- 
sults the  had  blood  between  European  travelers  and  the 
Polynesians  in  particular.  These  people  have  too  often 
complained  of  violence  exercised  by  Europeans,  who  have 
left  without  being  punished.     The  savage  watches  for  those 


MORAL  AND  RELIGIOUS   CHARACTERS.  I33 

who  come  after  the  really  guilty,  sets  a  trap  for  them,  and 
massacres  the  innocents.  He  applies  his  moral  law,  and  we 
find  the  theory  horrible.  But  forget  not  our  middle  age; 
we  have  got  the  start  a  little,  but,  in  our  day,  if  the  vendetta 
were  not  abolished  in  Corsica,  it  would  be  the  same,  as  it 
was  the  same  in  Scotland  between  clan  and  clan. 

For  the  rest,  gentlemen,  the  question  of  respect  for  the 
life  of  others  is  one  of  those  that  I  least  like  to  enter  upon, 
because  I  cannot  speak  without  blushing  for  the  white 
race.  You  know  that  it  rules  everywhere,  but  some  of  you 
do  not  know,  jDcrhaps,  that  everj^where  devastation  and 
massacre  have  marked  its  steps  round  the  w^orld.  It  seems 
that  it  has  used  its  superiority  to  annihilate  its  sister  races, 
and  reign  on  their  tombs. 

HI.  Respect  for  Self. — I  have  showni  you  that  the  evils 
of  which  we  accuse  the  savages  exist  with  us.  Permit  me 
to  show  you  among  them  the  good  of  which  civilized 
people  pretend  to  have  the  monopoly.  The  sentiments  of 
honor  and  of  modesty  are  certainly  two  of  the  most  noble 
and  most  delicate  of  the  respect  due  to  one's  self.  We  find 
these  two  sentiments  developed  sometimes  in  a  high  degree 
in  the  most  savage  peoples. 

It  is  evident  that  the  idea  of  modesty  must  vary  from 
one  region  to  another  ;  it  cannot  be  the  same  among  jDeople 
forced  by  the  climate  to  go  naked,  and  among  those  who 
are  compelled,  by  the  rigors  of  climate,  to  wear  clothes. 
We  ought,  in  this  respect,  to  look  for  marked  differences, 
and  to  take  account  of  these  exigencies ;  besides,  from 
the  nature  of  the  subject,  I  cannot  enter  into  details,  and 
I  will  only  say  that  more  than  one  traveler  has  expressed 
his  astonishment  to  find  more  of  true  modesty  among  naked 
savages  than  among  civilized  and  well-clothed  people. 

Honor  is,  perhaps,  the  sentiment  which  is  most  uni- 
formly manifested  among  these  people.  To  obey  the  sense 
of  honor,  they  hesitate  not  to  provoke  torments ;    to  brave, 


134  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

and  even  to  solicit,  death.  A  young  Kaffre  chief  is  con- 
demned to  death ;  he  may  be  pardoned  on  the  condition  of 
losing  his  ostrich-feather,  which  for  him  represents  epau- 
lets ;  he  demands,  as  a  favor,  to  be  thrown  to  the  crocodiles 
rather  than  be  dishonored.  The  red-skin  made  a  prisoner, 
bound  to  the  post  of  torture,  defies  his  enemies  to  ex- 
tract from  him  the  least  sign  of  suffering. 

That  which  we  call  chivalric  generosity  exists  among 
the  most  savage  peoples.  Two  Irishmen  quarreled  one  day 
with  some  Australians ;  they  were  without  arms.  Instead 
of  profiting  by  this  advantage,  the  savages  gave  them  arms 
that  they  might  defend  themselves. 

In  our  war  at  Tahiti,  Admiral  Bruet,  commander  of  the 
French  forces,  took  a  bath  one  day  in  a  river  of  the  interior 
of  the  isle,  while  a  well-armed  chief  belonging  to  the  enemy 
was  concealed  near  by.  When  peace  was  gained,  this  chief 
came  to  see  the  admiral,  and  easily  showed  him  that  for 
nearly  two  hours  his  life  had  been  in  his  power.  "  Why 
did  you  not  draw  ? "  said  the  admiral.  "  I  should  have 
been  dishonored  in  the  eyes  of  my  people,"  replied  the 
native,  "  if  I  had  killed  by  surprise  a  chief  such  as  thou." 

See  how  the  people  called  savages  often  conduct  them- 
selves.    Would  we  do  better  ? 

You  see,  gentlemen,  and  you  may  fearlessly  say,  to 
the  honor  of  our  species,  that  morality,  in  its  more  serious 
as  well  as  in  its  more  delicate  aspects,  is  found  among 
all  men ;    and,  decisively,  man  is  a  moral  being. 

II.  JieUgion. — I  come  now  to  another  order  of  consid- 
erations, that  it  will  jDerhaps  surprise  you  to  hear  me  dis- 
cuss. I  have  said,  at  different  times,  that  I  wished  to  remain 
a  man  of  science,  that  I  did  not  wish  to  enter  here  upon 
either  philosophy  or  theology,  and  yet  I  am  going  to  speak 
of  religion.  I  shall  continue  faithful  to  my  programme. 
It  is  as  a  naturalist  that  I  shall  take  up  the  subject.  As 
for  morality,  I  showed  the  existence  of  the  fiiculty :  then  I 


MORAL   AND   RELIGIOUS  CHARACTERS.  135 

pointed  out  some  general  facts,  reserving  the  special  facts 
for  the  history  of  races.  To-day,  as  heretofore,  I  shall 
avoid  with  care  the  dogmatic  and  the  theologic  side  of  the 
discussion. 

The  first  fact  to  establish  is  the  universality  of  the  mani- 
festations which  belong  to  religion.  In  every  countrj^, 
with  all  peoples,  in  all  races,  we  find  the  belief  in  beings 
superior  to  man,  and  influencing  his  destinj'  for  good  or 
evil.  Everywhere  we  find  the  belief  in  another  life  succeed- 
ing to  the  actual  life.  These  two  notions  lie  at  the  founda- 
tion of  all  religions,  and  wdioever  admits  them  is  religious. 
We  can  say,  then,  of  man  generally,  that  he  is  certainly  re- 
ligious. 

Objections  have  been  made  to  the  generality  of  this 
character.     Let  us  rapidly  examine  the  case. 

Some  authors  affirm  that  there  exist  atheistic  people. 
They  have  cited  in  proof  the  Australians  of  whom  I  have 
already  spoken,  and  Bushmen.  These  are  mistaken  asser- 
tions ;  but  this  error  may  be  explained.  Three  causes,  act- 
ing together  or  separately,  have  contributed  to  a  misunder- 
standing of  the  religious  beliefs  of  the  inferior  races  of  hu- 
manity. 

The  first  is  the  belief  of  travelers.  When  these  travel- 
ers are  missionaries,  having  an  ardent  faith  but  a  narrow 
intelligence,  they  are  easily  led  not  to  accept,  as  true,  reli- 
gious beliefs  so  difi"erent  from  their  own.  Often,  in  their 
eyes,  these  beliefs  are  a  work  of  the  devil ;  they  put  them 
aside,  or  do  not  take  the  trouble  to  discover  them,  and  they 
offer  us,  as  atheistic,  people  who  certainly  are  not. 

Ignorance  of  the  language  often  leads  to  regarding  a 
people  as  atheistic.  A  traveler  encounters  a  savage  tribe ; 
he  puts  questions,  well  or  ill,  often  by  signs  alone,  on  the 
Deity,  or  on  the  soul ;  the  natives  do  not  understand,  and 
reply  by  some  gesture  of  negation,  and  the  traveler  con- 
cludes that  they  believe  neither  in  God  nor  immortality. 


136  THE   NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

But,  the  great  cause  which  has  often  led  to  the  conclu- 
sion I  am  opposing,  is  the  disdain  of  Europeans  for  savages. 
Generally,  the  European,  proud  of 'his  knowledge,  and  over- 
rating his  superiority,  judges  in  advance  their  incapacity  to 
attain  to  notions  a  little  elevated.  He  takes  no  great  pains 
to  discover  what  he  believes  does  not  exist.  At  the  first 
failure  he  thinks  himself  right  in  concluding  that  these  in- 
ferior races  are  incapable  of  attaining  to  the  notion  of  God 
and  of  a  futiire  life. 

Happily  there  are  some  tolerant  missionaries  who  have 
studied  them  more  closely,  and  laymen  who  have  been  able 
to  see  brothers  in  these  inferior  representatives  of  the 
human  family.  Thanks  to  the  intelligence  of  these  patient, 
clear-headed  men,  we  now  know  that  these  Australians, 
that  were  said  to  have  no  idea  of  God,  have  in  reality  a  rudi- 
mentary mythology,  which  sometimes  recalls  our  own  Euro- 
pean superstitions.  We  now  know  that  the  Bushmen  deify 
their  great  men,  and  address  prayers  to  them.  These  Bush- 
men have  a  remarkable  idea  of  the  Divinity.  They  regard  him 
as  a  great  chief,  who  resides  in  heaven.  They  say  of  him : 
"  We  see  him  not  with  the  eyes ;  we  feel  him  in  the  heart." 

This  last  phrase,  which  I  quote  literally,  was  obtained 
1  y  travelers  who  lived  in  the  midst  of  these  people.  They 
show  that  sometimes  the  people  justly  placed  in  the  low- 
est rank  of  the  human  races  may  have,  along  with  the 
strangest  superstitions,  religious  notions  remarkably  ele- 
vated. This  fact  is  often  presented  when  we  examine  the 
religion  of  different  people.  We  find,  it  is  true,  much 
that  is  bizarre,  many  strange  and  shocking  things,  but  we 
find  also  behind  these  absurdities  ideas  and  beliefs  which 
astonish  us  by  their  seriousness,  by  their  elevation,  by  the 
resemblance  they  offer  to  that  which  is  believed  by  more 
advanced  people. 

The  negroes  of  Guinea  may  serve  to  illustrate  this  sub- 
ject.    All  travelers  have  spoken  of  their  absurd  beliefs,  all 


MORAL  AND  RELIGIOUS  CHARACTERS.  137 

have  spoken  of  their  fetiches.  They  tell  us  how  these  peo- 
ple prostrate  themselves  before  serpents,  trees,  bits  of 
wood,  bone,  etc.,  carefully  wrapped  uj3,  and  on  which  their 
priests  have  performed  certain  ceremonies.  Ihere  are  few 
who  would  seek  that  which  might  be  found  at  the  bottom 
of  all  this.  Those  who  have  made  the  search  have  found 
religious  ideas,  very  superior  to  these  appearances ;  the 
belief  in  divinities  of  different  orders,  living  in  the  skies, 
and  presided  over  by  a  sovereign  creator  who  made  every 
thing.  When  we  look  still  further,  as  M.  d'Avezac  has 
done,  we  find  prayers  conceived  in  terms  such  as  a  Euro- 
pean, a  Christian,  might  repeat  without  blushing.  In  the 
case  of  these  negroes,  as  in  our  own,  we  must  distinguish 
between  religion  and  superstition,  two  extremely  different 
things,  which  are  too  often  confounded.  I  will  add  but 
a  few  words. 

Gentlemen,  I  close  to-day  the  first  part  of  the  lectures 
that  I  have  undertaken  to  give  you.  Let  me  formulate  the 
last  conclusions. 

We  have  asked  only  general  questions,  those  which  bear 
on  the  entire  human  race,  and  which  may  consequently 
conduct  us  to  the  foundation  of  the  nature  of  man.  We 
have  asked  them  exclusively  from  the  point  of  view  of  natu- 
ral science ;  we  have  studied  man  as  we  study  an  animal 
or  a  plant.  The  result  of  this  examination  is  to  show  in 
man  a  resmiie  of  the  entire  creation. 

In  him  we  find  phenomena  exactly  parallel  to  those 
encountered  in  minerals,  in  plants ;  consequently,  all  the 
forces  acting  in  minerals  and  plants  we  find  in  man. 

By  his  body,  from  an  anatomical  and  physical  point  of 
view,  man  is  an  animal,  nothing  more,  nothing  less ;  hence 
all  the  animal  forces  act  in  him. 

But  is  it  by  his  body  that  man  has  acquired  that  em- 
pire that  we  have  seen  he  possesses  ?  You  know  very  well 
it  is  not ;  you  know  very  well  that,  if  he  reigns  over  all 


138  THE  NATURAL   HISTORY   OF   MAN. 

around  him,  over  inanimate  Nature  as  over  organized  Na- 
ture, he  owes  it  to  his  intelligence,  of  like  nature,  but  im- 
mensely superior  to  that  of  animals. 

Finally,  man  has  his  own  attributes — faculties  that 
belong  exclusively  to  him — morality  and  religion.  Well, 
these  exclusively  human  faculties  seem  admirably  to  com- 
plete this  exceptional  being.  It  is  these  that  ennoble  him, 
and  justify  the  incontestable  empire  that  he  claims  over 
the  globe ;  for  it  is  these  which,  along  with  the  sentiment 
of  punishment,  give  birth  to  the  idea  of  duty,  the  thought 
of  responsibility. 

Here,  gentlemen,  is  the  summing  up  that  one  is  led  to 
make  of  man  when  he  is  studied  exclusively  from  knowl- 
edge by  the  naturalist. 


APPEKDIX. 


Pkof.  Huxley,  in  his  volume  entitled  "  Evidence  as  to 
Man's  Place  in  Nature,"  presents  the  other  side  of  this 
question  as  follows :  "  Science  has  fulfilled  her  function 
when  she  has  ascertained  and  enunciated  truth  ;  and,  were 
these  pages  addressed  to  men  of  science  only,  I  should 
now  close  this  essay,  knowing  that  my  colleagues  have 
learned  to  respect  nothing  but  evidence,  and  to  believe 
that  their  highest  duty  lies  in  submitting  to  it,  however  it 
may  jar  against  their  inclinations. 

"  But,  desiring,  as  I  do,  to  reach  the  wider  circle  of  the 
intelligent  public,  it  would  be  unworthy  cowardice  were  I 
to  ignore  the  repugnance  with  which  the  majority  of  my 
readers  are  likely  to  meet  the  conclusions  to  which  the 
most  careful  and  conscientious  study,  I  have  been  able  to 
give  to  this  matter,  has  led  me. 

"  On  all  sides  I  shall  hear  the  cry :  '  We  are  men  and 
women,  and  not  a  mere  better  sort  of  apes,  a  little  longer 
in  the  leg,  more  compact  in  the  foot,  and  bigger  in  brain, 
than  your  brutal  chimpanzees  and  gorillas.  The  power  of 
knowledge,  the  consciousness  of  good  and  evil,  the  j^itiful 
tenderness  of  human  aflFections,  raise  us  out  of  all  real  fel- 
lowship with  the  brutes,  however  closely  they  may  seem 
to  approximate  us.' 


140  APPENDIX. 

"  To  this  I  can  only  reply  that  the  exclamation  would 
be  more  just  and  would  have  my  own  entire  sj-mpathy,  if 
it  w^ere  more  relevant.  But  it  is  not  I  who  seek  to  base 
man's  dignity  upon  his  great-toe,  or  insinuate  that  we  are 
lost  if  an  ape  has  an  hippocampus  minor.  On  the  contrary, 
I  have  done  my  best  to  sw^eep  away  this  vanity.  I  have 
endeavored  to  show  that  no  absolute  structural  line  of  de- 
marcation, wider  than  that  between  animals  w^iich  imme- 
diately succeed  us  in  the  scale,  can  be  drawn  between  the 
animal  world  and  ourselves ;  and  I  may  add  the  exjDression 
of  my  belief  that  the  attempt  to  draw  a  physical  distinc- 
tion is  equally  futile,  and  that  even  the  highest  faculties 
of  feeling  and  of  intellect  begin  to  germinate  in  lower 
forms  of  life.  At  the  same  time  no  one  is  more  strongly 
convinced  than  I  am  of  the  vastness  of  the  gulf  between 
civilized  man  and  the  brutes;  or  is  more  certain  that, 
whether  from  them  (5r  not,  he  is  assuredly  not  of  them. 
No  one  is  less  disposed  to  think  lightly  of  the  present  dig- 
nity, or  despairingly  of  the  future  hopes,  of  the  only  con- 
sciously intelligent  denizen  of  this  w^orld. 

"  We  are  indeed  told,  by  those  who  assume  authority 
in  these  matters,  that  the  two  sets  of  opinions  are  incom- 
patible, and  that  the  belief  in  the  unity  of  origin  of  man 
and  brutes  involves  the  brutalization  and  degradation  of 
the  former.  But  is  this  really  so  ?  Could  not  a  sensible 
child  confute,  by  obvious  arguments,  the  shallow^  rhetori- 
cians who  would  force  this  conclusion  upon  us  ?  Is  it  in- 
deed true  that  the  poet,  or  the  philosopher,  or  the  artist, 
whose  genius  is  the  glory  of  his  age,  is  degraded  from  his 
high  estate  by  the  undoubted  historical  probability,  not  to 
say  certainty,  that  he  is  the  direct  descendant  of  some 
naked  and  bestial  savage,  whose  intelligence  was  just  suf- 
ficient to  make  him  a  little  more  cunning  than  the  fox,  and 
by  so  much  more  dangerous  than  the  tiger?  Or  is  he 
bound  to  howl  and  grovel  on  all-fours  because  of  the  w^holly 


APPENDIX.  141 

unquestionable  fact  that  he  was  once  an  egg,  which  no 
ordinary  power  of  discrimination  could  distinguish  from 
that  of  a  dog  ?  Or  is  the  philanthropist,  or  the  saint,  to 
give  up  his  endeavors  to  lead  a  noble  life,  because  the 
simplest  study  of  man's  nature  reveals,  at  its  foundations, 
all  the  selfish  passions  and  fierce  appetites  of  the  merest 
quadruped  ?  Is  mother-love  vile  because  a  hen  shows  it, 
or  fidelity  base  because  dogs  possess  it  ? 

"  The  common-sense  of  the  mass  of  mankind  will  an- 
swer these  questions  without  a  moment's  hesitation. 
Healthy  humanity,  finding  itself  hard  pressed  to  escape 
from  real  sin  and  degradation,  will  leave  the  brooding  over 
speculative  pollution  to  the  cynics  and  the  righteous  '  over- 
much' who,  disagreeing  in  every  thing  else,  unite  in  blind 
insensibility  to  the  nobleness  of  the  visible  world,  and  in 
inability  to  appreciate  the  grandeur  of  the  place  man  occu- 
pies therein. 

"Nay,  more,  thoughtful  men,  once  escaped  from  the 
blinding  influences  of  traditional  prejudice,  will  find,  in  the 
lowly  stock  whence  man  has  sjDrung,  the  best  evidence  of 
the  splendor  of  his  capacities ;  and  will  discern,  in  his  long 
progress  through  the  past,  a  reasonable  ground  of  faith  in 
his  attainment  of  a  nobler  future." 


B. 


It  is  probable  that  if  M.  Quatrefages  had  made  the  ex- 
periment of  taking  persons  to  a  case  wherein  were  jackals, 
wolves,  and  varieties  of  "  dogs,"  from  the  Esquimaux  to  the 
greyhound,  the  bull-dog,  and  terriers  (not  labeled),  he 
would  have  come  to  an  entirely  difi'erent  conclusion.  In 
fact,  there  is  much  less  difference  between  the  w^olf  and 
some  dogs— e.  g.,  Esquimaux  and  Spitz— than  between 
them  and  some  fancy  breeds.     The  name  (dog)  indeed  is  a 


X42  APPENDIX. 

quasi  generic  term  connected  with  an  assumption  of  com- 
mon origin  of  the  animals  embraced  thereunder;  in  other 
words,  it  is  the  expression  of  a  preconceived  idea  which 
will  not  stand  the  test  of  analysis,  or  confronting  with 
facts.  So  far  are  the  propositions  that  dogs  and  wolves  are 
different  species  from  being  true,  that  the  eminent  John 
Hunter,  after  a  series  of  experiments  on  their  mutual  fer- 
tility, came  to  the  conclusion  that  they  (as  well  as  the 
jackal)  are  of  the  same  species,  and  M.  Quatrefages,  if 
obedient  to  his  own  criterion  of  specific  determination, 
should  have  come  to  the  same  conclusion. 


On  the  contrary,  not  only  have  hares  and  rabbits  fre- 
quently reproduced  with  each  other  {see  Gindre,  "  Rapport 
a  la  Commission  des  Recompenses  sur  le  Memoire  de  M. 
Gayot  relatif  aux  Leporides."  Bulletin  de  la  Societe  Im- 
periale  Zoologique  d'Acclimatation,  1870,  pp.  659-667),  but 
with  certain  precautions  they  readily  copulate  and  produce 
young,  and  these  hybrids  and  their  descendants  are  fertile 
among  themselves,  and  the  hybrids  between  the  hare  and 
the  leporide  are  "  fine  and  valuable  animals  for  the  table, 
growing  quickly  and  attaining  a  greater  size  than  the  lepo- 
rides. They  are  excellent  for  the  market,  and  can  be  sent 
there  when  four  months  old.  They  have  admirable  health, 
beauty,  and  size"  {op.  cit.,  1873,  p.  871). 


D. 


Our  information  respecting  hj^brids  is  too  limited  as 
yet  to  afford  us  a  sufficiently  large  inductive  basis  for  gen- 
eralization, but  it  is  at  least  certain  that  M.  Quatrefages's 


APPENDIX.  143 

laws  are  altogether  too  general,  and  that,  in  fact,  there  are 
no  such  laws.  In  the  cases  especially  referred  to  (the 
horse  and  the  ass),  we  have  representatives  not  only  of 
different  species  but  of  different  genera ;  and,  although  the 
hybrids  of  these,  as  a  rule,  are  infertile,  exceptionally  they 
have  reproduced  with  the  parent-stock.  In  another  case, 
however,  where  the  representatives  not  only  of  different 
genera  {JBos  and  Bison)  were  coupled,  the  hybrids  were 
perfectly  fruitful  when  coupled  with  the  parent  buffalo, 
and,  so  far  as  the  exj^eriments  are  recorded,  no  difficulty 
was  experienced  in  raising  offspring  from  the  hybrids. 
Still  more :  there  are  two  species  of  geese  so  distinct  that 
they  have  been  geiierically  separated,  i.  e.,  the  common 
goose  (^Anser)  and  the  Chinese  {Cygyiopsis^  Gygnoides), 
and  yet  not  only  have  (1)  hybrids  been  obtained,  but  those 
hybrids  (2)  were  fertile  with  the  parents,  and  (3)  with  each 
other,  to  an  indefinite  extent.  In  a  state  of  nature,  too^ 
on  the  confines  of  the  geographical  limits  of  two  species 
of  woodpecker  ( Golaptes  auratus  and  Golaptes  Mexicaniis), 
intermediate  forms  of  all  degrees  are  found,  and  in  such 
numbers  as  to  have  produced  a  specific  name  {^Golaptes 
hybrides)^  and  the  inference  is  that  they  are  hj^brids  be- 
tween the  different  species,  and  are  fertile  among  them- 
selves. Many  examples  of  like  and  even  excessive  fertility 
of  hybrids  might  be  adduced  in  the  case  of  plants.  It  must 
be  admitted,  however,  that  in  a  state  of  nature  animals  of 
the  same  kind  prefer  to  associate  together,  and  that  infer- 
tility^ or  diminished  fertility ^  is  the  eule  when  animals 
and 2'jlants  of  very  different  sjyecies  unite. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  have  another  curious  assemblage 
of  facts.  The  experiments  of  various  investigators,  and 
especially  of  Mr.  Darwin  and  Fritz  MuUer,  prove  that, 
when  flowers  are  dependent  on  self-fertilization,  there  is 
diminished  fertility,  and  even  barrenness,  and  every  stock- 
breeder will  testify  to  the  impoverishment  of  stock  by 
7 


144  APPENDIX. 

interbreeding.  In  connection  with  the  rule  just  referred  to, 
then,  we  have  to  consider  another,  i.  e.,  that  infertility^  or 
diminished  fertility^  is  the  rule  when  animcds  and  plants 
very  closely  related  ifiy  consanguinity')  unite.  Sterility  is 
thus  a  two-edged  weapon  which  must  be  used  with  caution, 
or  not  used  till  w^e  know  more  about  it,  and  the  accumu- 
lated evidence  tends  to  show  that  there  is  every  degree  of 
fertility  and  sterility  coordinated,  but  in  not  very  definite 
ratio,  with  the  affinities  of  the  subjects. 

The  chief  objection  of  many  eminent  naturalists  of 
England,  Germany,  and  the  United  States,  to  the  view  of 
species  presented  by  M.  Quatrefages,  is  its  assumption 
that  they  are  immutable.  The  works  of  Mr.  Charles  Dar- 
win, published  from  time  to  time  during  the  last  ten  or 
twelve  years,  have  led  to  a  wide-spread  suspicion  that 
varieties  are  incipient  species,  and  that  the  prevalent  ste- 
rility of  species,  when  crossed,  is  due  to  changes  in  the 
reproductive  system,  brought  about,  if  not  in  the  same  way 
as  are  the  changes  that  produce  varieties  and  races,  that  i«, 
by  natural  selection,  yet  that  they  have  arisen  incidentally 
during  the  slow  formation  of  species  in  connection  with 
other  and  unknown  changes  in  their  organization.  Dar- 
win's work  on  the  "  Origin  of  Species  "  is  filled  with  facts 
and  arguments  in  support  of  this  view.  In  his  chapter 
upon  Hybridism,  Mr.  Darwin  says :  "  It  is  certain,  on  the 
one  hand,  that  the  sterility  of  various  species  when  crossed 
is  so  different  in  degree,  and  graduates  away  so  insensibly, 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  that  fertility  of  pure  species  is  so 
easily  affected  by  various  circumstances,  that  for  all  practi- 
cal purposes  it  is  most  difficult  to  say  where  perfect  fer- 
tility ends  and  sterility  begins.  I  think  no  better  evidence 
of  this  can  be  required  than  that  the  two  most  experienced 
observers  who  have  ever  lived,  namely,  Kolreuter  and  Gart- 
ner, arrived  at  diametrically  opposite  conclusions  in  regard 
to  the. very  same  forms.     It  is  also  most  instructive  to 


APPENDIX.  145 

compare  tbe  evidence  advanced  by  our  best  botanists  on 
the  question  whether  certain  doubtful  forms  should  be 
ranked  as  species  or  varieties,  with  the  evidence  from  fer- 
tility adduced  by  diflferent  hybridizers,  or  by  the  same  ob- 
server from  experiments  made  during  different  years.  It 
can  thus  be  shown  that  neither  sterility  nor  fertility  affords 
any  certain  distinction  between  species  and  varieties.  The 
evidence  from  this  source  graduates  away,  and  is  doubtful 
in  the  same  degree  as  is  the  evidence  from  other  constitu- 
tional and  structural  differences."     Again  he  says : 

"  I  have  as  yet  spoken  as  if  the  varieties  of  the  same  species 
were  invariably  fertile  when  intercrossed.  But  it  is  impossible  to 
resist  the  evidence  of  the  existence  of  a  certain  amount  of  sterility 
in  the  few  following  cases,  which  I  will  briefly  abstract.  The 
evidence  is  at  least  as  good  as  that  from  which  we  believe  in  the 
sterility  of  a  multitude  of  species.  Tlie  evidence  is,  also,  derived 
from  hostile  witnesses,  who  in  all  other  cases  consider  fertility 
and  sterility  as  safe  criterions  of  specific  distinction.  Gartner 
kept  during  several  years  a  dwarf  kind  of  maize  with  yellow 
seeds,  and  a  tall  variety  with  red  seeds  growing  near  each  other 
in  his  garden ;  and  although  these  plants  have  separated  sexes, 
they  never  naturally  crossed.  He  then  fertilized  thirteen  flowers 
of  the  one  kind  with  pollen  of  the  other;  but  only  a  single  head 
produced  any  seed,  and  this  one  head  produced  only  five  grains. 
Manipulation  in  this  case  could  not  have  been  injurious,  as  the 
plants  have  separated  sexes.  No  one,  I  believe,  has  suspected 
that  these  varieties  of  maize  are  distinct  species ;  and  it  is  im- 
portant to  notice  that  the  hybrid  plants  thus  raised  were  them- 
selves perfectly  fertilQ ;  so  that  even  Gartner  did  not  venture  to 
consider  the  two  varieties  as  specifically  distinct. 

"  Girou  de  Buzareingues  crossed  three  varieties  of  gourd, 
which  like  the  maize  has  separated  sexes,  and  he  asserts  that  their 
mutual  fertilization  is  by  so  much  the  less  easy  as  their  differences 
are  greater.  How  far  these  experiments  may  be  trusted,  I  know 
not ;  but  the  forms  experimented  on  are  ranked  by  Sagaret,  who 
mainly  founds  his  classification  by  the  test  of  infertility,  as  vari- 
eties, and  I^audin  has  come  to  the  same  conclusion. 


146  APPENDIX. 

"  The  following  case  is  far  more  remarkable,  and  seems  at  first 
incredible ;  but  it  is  the  result  of  an  astonishing  number  of  ex- 
periments made  during  many  years  on  nine  species  of  Yerbascum, 
by  so  good  an  observer  and  so  hostile  a  witness  as  Gartner : 
namely,  that  the  yellow  and  white  varieties  when  crossed  produce 
less  seed  than  the  similarly-colored  varieties  of  the  same  species. 
Moreover,  he  asserts  that,  when  yellow  and  white  varieties  of 
one  species  are  crossed  with  yellow  and  white  varieties  of  a  dis- 
tinct species,  more  seed  is  produced  by  the  crosses  between  the 
similarly-colored  flowers  than  between  those  which  are  different- 
ly colored.  Mr.  Scott  also  has  experimented  on  the  species  and 
varieties  of  Verbascum ;  and,  although  unable  to  confirm  Gartner's 
results  on  the  crossing  of  the  distinct  species,  he  finds  that  the 
dissimilarly-colored  varieties  of  the  same  species  yield  fewer 
seeds,  in  tlie  proportion  of  86  to  100,  than  the  similarly- colored 
varieties.  Yet  these  varieties  differ  in  no  respect  except  in  the 
color  of  their  flowers ;  and  one  variety  can  sometimes  be  raised 
from  the  seed  of  another. 

"  Kolreuter,  whose  accuracy  has  been  confirmed  by  every  sub- 
sequent observer,  has  proved  the  remarkable  fact  that  one  par- 
ticular variety  of  the  common  tobacco  was  more  fertile  than  the 
other  varieties,  when  crossed  with  a  widely-distinct  species.  He 
experimented  on  five  forms  which  are  commonly  reputed  to  be 
varieties,  and  which  he  tested  by  the  severest  trial,  namely,  by 
reciprocal  crosses,  and  he  found  their  mongrel  offspring  perfectly 
fertile.  But  one  of  these  five  varieties,  when  used  either  as  the 
father  or  mother,  and  crossed  with  the  Nicotiana  glutinosa^  al- 
ways yielded  hybrids  not  so  sterile  as  those  which  were  pro- 
duced from  tlie  four  other  varieties  when  crossed  with  Nicoti- 
ana  glutinosa.  Hence  the  reproductive  system  of  this  one 
variety  must  have  been  in  some  manner  and  in  some  'degree 
modified. 

"  From  these  facts  it  can  no  longer  be  maintained  tliat  vari- 
eties when  crossed  are  invariably  quite  fertile.  From  the  great 
difficulty  of  ascertaining  the  infertility  of  varieties  in  a  state  of 
nature,  for  a  supposed  variety,  if  proved  to  be  infertile  in  any 
degree,  would  almost  universally  be  ranked  as  a  species ;  from 
man  attending  only  to  external  characters  in  his  domestic  vari- 
eties, and  from  such  varieties  not  having  been  exposed  for  very 


APPENDIX.  147 

long  periods  to  uniform  conditions  of  life ;  from  these  several 
considerations  we  may  conclude  that  fertility  does  not  constitute 
a  fundamental  distinction  between  varieties  and  species  when 
crossed.  The  general  sterility  of  crossed  species  may  safely  l)e 
looked  at,  not  as  a  special  acquirement  or  endowment,  but  as 
incidental  on  changes  of  an  unknown  nature  in  their  sexual  ele- 
ments, 

"  Independently  of  the  question  of  fertility  and  sterility,  in 
all  other  respects  there  seems  to  be  a  general  and  close  similarity 
in  the  offspring  of  crossed  species,  and  of  crossed  varieties.  If  we 
look  at  species  as  having  been  specially  created,  and  at  varieties 
as  having  been  produced  by  secondary  laws,  this  similarity  would 
be  an  astonishing  fact.  But  it  harmonizes  perfectly  with  the 
view  that  there  is  no  essential  distinction  between  species  and 
varieties." 


E. 

It  will  occur  to  many  of  our  readers  that  in  this  propo- 
sition a  logical  fallacy  in  the  form  of  a  petitio  principii 
is  involved.  It  is  assumed — 1.  That  fertility  is  an  invariable 
criterion  of  varieties,  and  2.  That  infertility  is  an  equally 
invariable  criterion  of  species,  and,  as  expressly  urged,  no 
structural  evidence  is  sufficient  to  gainsay  that  evidence. 
Applying  these  criterions — (1)  inasmuch  as  no  limit  has 
been  found  to  the  fertility  between  the  common  goose  and 
the  Chinese  goose,  those  animals  are  of  the  same  species, 
and  (2)  inasmuch  as  no  fruit  has  been  obtained  from  individ- 
ual flowers  of  the  same  plant  of  certain  species  of  lobelia, 
passion-flowers,  orchids,  etc.  (although  fertile  with  those 
of  other  plants),  those  individuals  belong  to  different 
species  !  The  reductio  ad  ahsurdum  is  indeed  completed 
by  the  terms  of  M.  Quatrefages's  propositions,  and  the 
facts  confronting  them. 


148  APPENDIX. 


F. 


Other  views  are  entertained  by  eminent  archseologists. 
In  an  address  before  the  Oriental  Society  of  London,  Sep- 
tember 20,  1874,  Prof.  Richard  Owen  makes  a  strong 
claim  as  a  geologist  for  the  recognition  of  far  more  ex- 
tended periods  of  time  since  the  appearance  of  man  than 
are  usually  allowed  by  anthropologists.  He  states  that 
probably  we  must  remove  the  scene  of  the  origin  of  man 
to  anotlier  continent,  which  has  been  since  submerged,  leav- 
ing only  an  archipelago.     Prof.  Owen  says : 

"  The  Papuans  of  l^ew  Guinea,  with  cognate  dark-skinned, 
crisp-haired,  prognathic  peoples  of  Australia,  New  Hebrides,  New 
Caledonia,  and  neighboring  islands,  bespeak  by  affinities  of  their 
rude  dialects,  as  well  as  by  physical  characters,  a  low  and  early 
race  of  mankind,  which  in  some  respects  indicate  kinship  with  the 
Boschismen  of  South  Africa,  but  are  yet  sufficiently  distinct  to  sug- 
gest a  long  term  of  existence  in  another  and  distant  continent. 
Zoological  and  geological  evidences  concur,  as  in  a  degree  exem- 
plified in  Wallace's  'Malay  Archipelago,'  to  point  to  a  prehistoric 
race  of  mankind,  existing  generation  after  generation  on  a  con- 
tinent which,  in  course  of  gradual,  non-cataclysmal,  geological 
change,  has  been  broken  up  into  insular  patches  of  land  ;  there  such 
race  is  still  open  to  ethnological  study.  "Wending  westward  to 
regain  the  proper  field  of  our  congress,  we  have  evidences  of  as 
early — if  I  say  '  primitive  '  it  is  because  we  know  none  earlier — 
bipeds,  in  the  trans-Gangetic  peninsula  and  Indonesian  Archi- 
pelago. These  Nigritos,  in  India,  have  fled  before  invaders  from 
the  sub-Himalayan  range,  represented  by  Burmese  and  Siamese ; 
before  invaders  from  the  South,  the  Malays,  with  their  maritime 
advance  in  civilization;  before  later  immigrations  from  the  North, 
with  the  religion  and  literature  respectively  of  the  Aryan  Hindoos 
and  the  Arab  Mussulmans.  Fragments  of  the  dwarf  Nigrito 
stratum  may  be  picked  up — a  scanty  one  in  Engomho,  the  largest 
island  off  Sumatra,  in  the  Mergui  Archipelago,  in  the  Nicobar 
Isles,  and  in  the  Andamans.  The  Nigritos  who  have  survived 
such  changes,  and  have  been  caught,  so  to  speak,  upon  a  new  con- 


APrENDIX.  149 

tinent,  have  ])reserve(l  themselves  in  mountain  fastnesses  and 
forests,  have  fled  before  hiter  immigrants,  have  never  assimilated 
therewith,  have  always  been  looked  upon  by  them  as  prior  in 
time,  and  now  are  verging  toward  extinction.  In  speculating, 
therefore,  on  the  place  of  origin  of  Mincopics  and  hill-tribes,  I 
would  impress  upon  ethnologists  to  set  aside  ideas  of  the  actual 
disposition  of  land  and  sea  as  being  necessarily  related  thereto, 
and  to  associate  with  the  beginning  of  such  low  forms  of  humanity 
a  lapse  of  time  in  harmony  with  the  latest  geological  changes  of 
the  earth's  surface.  .  .  .  The  cardinal  defect  of  speculators  on  the 
origin  of  the  human  species  seems  to  me  to  be  the  assumption  that 
the  present  geographical  condition  of  the  earth's  surface  preceded 
or  coexisted  with  the  origin  of  such  species." 


G. 

Some  of  our  readers  will  hardly  be  prepared  to  learn 
that  M.  Gratiolet  scarcely  knew  any  thing  whatever  from 
autopsy  of  the  development  of  the  brain  in  any  of  the  true 
apes  (Simiinm),  and  that  the  only  basis  for  the  strong 
statements  made  in  the  text  is  as  follows : 

"  I  have  found,"  says  Gratiolet,  "  by  a  careful  compari- 
son of  adult  brains  in  men  and  monkeys,  that  they  are  ar- 
ranged  in  the  same  plan  as  to  the  gyrations^  and,  when  the 
view  is  thus  limited  to  the  adult  structure,  there  is  no 
marked  ground  for  separating  them.  But,  in  studying 
the  development,  I  find  that  in  apes"  (monkeys)  "  ^Ae 
gyrations  of  the  posterior  lobes  appear  before  those  of 
the  anterior  lobes,  which  is  just  the  reverse  of  the  suc- 
cession in  man."  The  differences,  in  fact,  simply  amount 
to  this : 

(a.)  In  man  the  appearance  of  the  superficial  convolu- 
tions is  accelerated  toward  the  anterior  portion  of  the  cere- 
brum, and  to  such  a  degree  that  those  of  the  anterici  lobe 
are  first  developed. 


150  APPENDIX. 

(b.)  In  monkej^s  the  development  of  the  same  convolu- 
tions is  retarded,  and  consequently  those  of  the  temporal 
lobes  are  first  developed. 

Such  are  the  differences  which  isolate  man  from  "  ani- 
mals ! " 

But  even  such  differences,  as  already  intimated,  have 
not  been  verified,  in  the  case  of  the  apes ;  and  far  from  the 
inference  being  a  necessary  one  that  their  development  will 
be  the  same  as  in  the  lower  monkeys,  it  is  scarcely  legiti- 
mate as  a  provisional  one,  inasmuch  as  the  higher  apes  in 
many  features  notably  resemble  man  more  than  the  mon- 
key, and  it  may  be  that  they  represent  an  intermediate 
stage,  or  even  that  they  approximate  most  to  man  in 
those  respects.  At  least  the  statement  in  the  text  is 
premature. 

But  perhaps  the  same  succession  may  be  verified  in  the 
apes  as  in  monkeys;  and  there  are  parallel  cases  which 
M.  Quatrefages  has  neglected — notably  the  development  of 
the  teeth. 

The  teeth  are  essentially  similar  in  man  and  the  apes 
(as  are  the  convolutions,  according  to  M.  Gratiolet),  "but, 
in  studying  the  development,"  it  is  found  that  in  apes  the 
hindmost  (as  well  as  other)  grinders  appear  before  the 
canines  of  the  second  set,  "  which  is  just  the  reverse  of 
their  succession  in  man,"  in  whom  they  are  cut  after  the 
canines  (eye-teeth)  of  the  second  series;  and  in  this  re- 
spect the  lowest  apes  (gibbons)  most  nearly  resemble  him  ! 

Inasmuch,  however,  as  there  is  no  exact  ratio  as  to 
dates  in  the  relative  appearance  of  these  teeth,  any  more 
than  there  is  in  the  development  of  the  convolutions  of 
the  brain,  although  the  formal  antithesis  may  appear  strik- 
ing, in  reality,  there  is  a  gradual  transition  from  one  type 
to  the  other,  and  it  would  be  unsafe  for  man  to  base  his 
tenure  to  manhood  in  the  possession  of  any  such  differ- 
ences.    A  little  acceleration  of  the  one,  a  little  retarda- 


APPENDIX.  151 

tion  of  the  other,  would  result  in  approximation ;  in  time, 
if  continued,  would  bring  coincidence,  and  finally  reversal 
of  development. 


H. 

This  very  decided  opinion  of  Quatrefages's  may  be  met 
by  the  equally  decided  counter-statement  of  Mr.  Darwin, 
as  given  in  his  work  on  the  "  Descent  of  Man."  In  sum- 
ming up  the  evidence  and  arguments  which  he  has  em- 
ployed, he  says  that  the  conclusion  now  held  by  many 
competent  naturalists  is,  that  man  is  descended  from  some 
lower  and  extinct  form.  The  close  similarity  between  man 
and  the  lower  animals  in  embryonic  development  and  in 
bodily  structure  and  constitution,  the  rudimentary  organs 
he  retains,  which  are  regularly  present  and  highly  service- 
able to  many  animals,  and  the  reversions  to  which  he  is 
liable,  are  facts  which  cannot  be  disputed.  They  have 
long  been  known,  but  told  us  nothing  of  the  origin  of  man, 
till  viewed  by  the  light  of  our  recent  know^ledge.  It  is 
now  seen  that  the  great  principle  of  Evolution  stands  up 
clear,  firm,  and  unmistakable,  when  these  facts  are  consid- 
ered in  connection  with  the  classification  of  organized  be- 
ings, their  geographical  distribution  and  geological  succes- 
sion. It  is  incredible  that  all  these  facts  should  speak 
falsely.  A  careful  study  of  the  phenomena  of  Nature,  in 
their  connections,  forces  us  to  admit  that  the  close  resem- 
blance of  the  embryo  of  man  to  that,  for  instance,  of  a  dog, 
the  construction  of  his  skull,  limbs,  and  whole  frame,  on  the 
same  plan  as  that  of  other  mammals — the  occasional  reap- 
pearance of  various  structures,  which  man  does  not  nor- 
mally possess,  but  which  are  common  to  the  quadrumana, 
and  a  crowd  of  analogous  facts — all  point  in  the  plainest 
manner  to  the  conclusion  that  man  is  tlie  co-descendanf 
with  other   mammals  of  a  common  progenitor,  that  we  car 


152  APPENDIX. 

approximately  place  in  its  proper  position  in  the  zoological 
series.  We  thus  learn  that  man  is  descended  from  a  hairy 
quadruped,  furnished  with  a  tail  and  pointed  ears,  probably 
arboreal  in  its  habits,  and  an  inhabitant  of  the  Old  World. 
This  creature,  if  its  whole  structure  had  been  examined  by 
a  naturalist,  would  have  been  classed  among  quadrumana, 
as  surely  as  would  the  common  and  still  more  ancient  pro- 
genitor of  the  Old  and  New  World  monkeys. 


THE    END. 


SE? 


a        1310 


7  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO 


HHTHROPOLOGY  LIBRARY 

This  publication  is  due  on  the  LAST  DATE 
and  HOUR  stamped  below. 


APR  1  -5  lyyu 

OTBisf.j(\N29'9C 

1 

Kr>17-30>/(-10.'74                                   General  Library 
(SI  (i64i.)tl  ss                             University  of  California 

Berkeley 

U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


CDDbDflT7M? 


